There is often a lot of nervousness around interviews, and the worry is entirely justified. Sure, some people can do a bad application, simply because they don’t know what a government application requires, but once you learn that, you should be able to get screened in for anything that you have sufficient experience for which to apply. For the written exams, it doesn’t look a whole lot different from a school test, so people know how to study. In other words, you can control your performance in a fairly predictable fashion and with some practice, get a good or at least passing mark. But interviews are often viewed as a different beast.
Some people think it is because the interviewer is trying to “trick” them, but that’s rarely the case in a government interview. There are no “tricks or traps” at the sub-EX level, and while they are more difficult to prepare for, you CAN indeed improve your preparation so that your outcome is also improved. But nervousness, and the artificial nature of government interviews, often means you can be perfectly prepared and yet still bomb the interview. It happens.
In my view, most of that nervousness comes from worrying beforehand about what questions they’ll be asking and what they’ll be looking for…yet both are entirely knowable.
Five types of interviews
There are five types of government interviews, ranging from the casual up to the very formal.
- Informational Interview – where you are asking for a meeting with someone, and you have no idea if they have any jobs available;
- Casual Deployment Interview – often when people move around in government, they do so because they have heard that manager x or y is looking for someone, or that manager already knows you and has reached out directly, and so you’re having a casual conversation about what they do and what your interests are, just seeing if there is mutual interest;
- Formal Deployment Interview – this is where the manager has announced a position at level, and you have formally applied, often without knowing the manager or other staff in the area;
- Formal Competition Interview – this is the “full” interview that most people fear the most, and will be the main focus of this chapter; and,
- The Best Fit Interview – this is after you have made a “pool” and you are meeting with a hiring manager to talk a bit informally about the exact position and your interests (looking very much like a hybrid of the second and third ones above).
A. The Informational Interview
For those not recognizing the term, an informational interview is where you basically want to talk to someone about their area of work to find out what life is like working in that area, if there are jobs available, or what openings might be coming up, etc. So you have cold-called (or cold-emailed) them and asked if they would be free for a meeting for coffee. Or got a friend to introduce you and then you asked if they have time for a chat.
Now, let`s be frank. Most people asking for informational interviews are really saying, “Hey, wanna hire me?”. But they have learned, or been advised by people like me, that if you ask to meet with someone to talk about openings in their area, the person will usually decline to meet with you. They’re not being rude, they’re being practical. If they had an opening, they would advertise it, and you would have to apply through the main system; if they don’t, they can easily say “no, we don’t have anything available” and avoid wasting their time and yours.
By contrast, if you contact them and ask for a chance to meet with them to get some advice from them, the person might find it hard to say no. Partly because THAT response is kind of rude, partly because they remember when they were in the same boat and someone gave them info they didn’t already have or met with them to give them some insights, and partly because people like talking about themselves and you’ve already flattered them by suggesting they are worthy of meeting with to pick their giant, knowledgeable brains!
Plus, if you are in government, there is a component of your job that is supposed to be about building the public service so there’s almost a values-and-ethics component that encourages you as a manager to say yes to these types of requests. No, that doesn’t mean the Deputy Minister or CEO of a crown corporation will meet with anyone who asks, i.e. they’ll almost always delegate if you waste your time even asking, but managers and middle managers often (almost to the level of “usually”, but not quite) will say yes to a request for an info interview.
Remember though that you are asking for an info interview…so what are you going to get out of that? Information and advice.
To make sure you get the most out of the interview, you should do some basic research into what their organization does, and if you can, what their own group does. Do NOT go into the interview knowing nothing about them. You need to show you invested some time in preparing (not to impress them, just so you look professional). Some people think, “Oh, if I can ask 500 Qs about the area, I’ll show how interested I am” but what you’ll really show is how unfocused you are. Figure out what areas you want to ask about in advance, particularly in case the person throws the ball back to you and says, “So, what do you want to know about?”.
Depending on how advanced your career is at this point, you have two choices for an opening gambit:
- If you’re already in government and have been for a little while, you can start with a very short “pitch” about yourself to say, “Well, I’ve been in government for x years now, and mostly doing [x]. I really enjoy [aspect y], and I think I’ve developed some degree of skill at [aspect z]. But I’m thinking ahead to the types of areas I might want to work in some day, and your area seems like one where I might be able to build on those experiences and skills. So I was mostly hoping you could tell me about the type of work that the units in your area do, and if I’m on the right track with my background so far.”
I have to confess, I love this opening. Obviously, based on your research, you’re going to have chosen examples for [x], [y] and [z] that not only reflect your skills and experience but also link directly to their work. You did your research, you have some idea what they do and need, at least at a high-level, and you think you might be a fit. On top of it, you have said “SOME DAY” to take the pressure off that you’re looking for something NOW, which allows him or her to be more open if they wish. In addition, you have given them three openings [x, y, z] for them to talk about how they fit within their area. It gets them talking. Plus, you asked them to tell you if you’re on the right track.
- If you are new to government or outside government, you can start with a short pitch about yourself to say, “Well, I have a background in [x] and some work experience in [y]. I really enjoy [x2, y2] and they seemed like areas that I might be able to use in your area. Unfortunately, I’m having trouble breaking in, partly because I don’t know enough about the type of work that is done on a day to day basis, or where I could aim to start. So I was mostly hoping you could tell me about the type of work that the units in your area do, and if I’m on the right track with my background so far.”
This one is really challenging to nuance. Why? Because you’re being self-deprecating to get them to give you targeted info, but at the same time, you want to impress them enough that they think highly of you in the future. Most important, though, is that you are not saying “How can YOU help ME break in?”. You’re just asking for info and advice.
At this point, you have accomplished the trifecta for getting good info and advice from them — your personal profile + your skills/competencies/interests + their knowledge of their area.
Note that it’s good if you can make it a real conversation rather than an interrogation, and while you are often trying to fake your way into a job interview, you should try to keep your personal “pitch” about yourself relatively short. You’re there to listen, not talk about yourself or show off what YOU know about their job. If they want to know more about your experience, they’ll ask. One key take-away that you’re likely to get, if you focus correctly, is a better understanding of what other skills you might need to get into the industry. If the conversation stalls, you can even prompt to say, “What other skills, beyond the ones that I mentioned, do you think people entering your area should have?”
The other tip for the conversation is you want to be able to ask some intelligent questions…preferably one that shows some relatively straight-forward linkage. It’s good, for example, to ask how some of the research they might describe gets translated into recommendations — is it done by the same team, or is it handed off to someone else? Or if it was about Gs&Cs, does the same team do the review of proposals and the monitoring of projects (i.e. like CIDA) or is it separated (i.e. like most other departments who have separate delivery arms)? Do NOT try to come up with some brilliant question that you know nothing about just to use some big words…”So, I see you have a lot of technology supporting your delivery…how are you set up for block-chain conversion?” might be a great question in the right context, but just throwing it into your conversation willy-nilly will likely just make you look like an idiot. If in your research, you found out their program was recently in the news, and you both read and understood the articles, you can make a small leap to draw linkages to it, but I wouldn’t go much further.
So now you have covered “you”, “what the jobs require”, gaps you might need to fill, and ensuring it all ran like a normal conversation.
That only leaves one area remaining — asking advice on how to proceed. Now, obviously, if they just said “you need experiences [a,b,c]” you don’t want to say “So what should I do next?” as an open-ended question. But you can say, “So, I need to expand into experiences [a,b,c]. Are there areas where others on your team have gained those experiences where you think I could follow in their footsteps?”. It doesn’t have to be that precise, it depends on the conversation, but it should be somewhat pointed. You want specific advice, so you should try to be specific.
As a final tip, you also want to try to manage the duration of the meeting and respect their time. If they say they’ll give you 30 minutes, keep it to 30. You want to end smoothly, not like a timekeeper who blows the whistle and then rushes out the door, but do try to respect the duration and manage your time accordingly. You will also likely be able to tell if they’re feeling rushed to do something else or not. Take their cue. And I will readily confess that this is a “do as I say, not as I do” type tip. I regularly get involved in great conversations with future bosses, and what should have been 30 minutes is now an hour or more, just because we got into the issues. I like to think if they were hating the conversation they would shoo me out, and they didn’t. But they’ll also respect you more if you respect their time.
And when it’s over, if you want to follow-up, do so with gratitude, not a bunch of requests.
I know, I know, a lot of people told you to do the interviews to network, to build your contacts. And the secondary purposes of the interviews — gain exposure, build a contact network, or even leverage it towards a job — are all possible, but you need to manage your expectations. After all, you started the conversation by asking for information. Sometimes, that’s all it will turn out to be.
Yes, you made a contact. But not every person you meet will create a “lasting relationship” or a lasting network contact. Nor are they automatically your BFF, so don’t start spamming them. You’ll know (or should know) if the person is open to further contact or not, or if you felt a connection or not. Sometimes you’re going to meet with someone where there’s no connection, no chemistry, and it’s just not a good fit. Maybe they’re busy, maybe they’re not very friendly, maybe they’re just plain jerks. Or maybe they just don’t like you. It happens.
But you didn’t ask them on a date looking for lifelong romance, you asked them for information and advice. And, hopefully, if you manage it right, that’s what you got.
B. Casual deployment
Once you are in government, people often move simply through deployment. Deployments are lateral moves exactly at level i.e. no promotion involved, and because of that, it is a lot less complex and formal than some of the other types of moves. You are already “appointed” at level, i.e. someone already ran a competition and appointed you at that level so the “proof” of you meriting that level has already been done…the only paperwork to do in a deployment is for the manager to say how you meet the criteria.
Of course, just to confuse things, you can find out about deployments either through a very formal process (such as it being advertised) or just generally through the grapevine. For example, you hear that a manager is looking for someone at your level. Or perhaps a former boss told you there was someone looking. Either way, you want the job.
Reaching out to them is a lot like the cold-call process, although you might use a bit of a hook if a friend or colleague or former boss is referring you to them. You’ll provide a copy of your resume, express your interest in the position or at least in having a conversation with them if they’re interested, and you’ll give them a short email to grab their interest. Preferably something like “I have 3 years working in a similar job and I’m looking for a change”, and then a few lines explaining the type of work you are doing that is similar to their opening.
Chances are that they are going to be interviewing several people, and I hesitate to even call them candidates because it is all informal. No rating guide prepared, no formal job description, no formal questions. Really, they’re just meeting people to see if there is a match of interest. If there is, they’ll check some references, maybe ask for a writing sample, etc., narrow it down a bit more. But they are only going to do that if there was a match, or to use the official parlance, a “right fit” between you and their opening.
The interview is going to be very informal, and will run one of two ways:
a. They’ll start by telling you what the job is, and then you’ll describe how some of your experience relates to it; or,
b. They’ll let you tell them something about yourself, and then they’ll tell you about the job.
I know, I know. You’re thinking the second option would be stupid. Except you are reaching out to them. They think you already know about the job, or you wouldn’t be interested. Ninety percent of the time, you’re going to start by asking them to tell you a bit about the job, and then you’ll be back in option (a). Which sounds normal, safe, logical. You may not want that option though, and I’ll explain later why.
First, let’s assume they describe the job. It’s going to look a lot like they’re writing Statement of Merit Criteria for a formal posting. They’re going to mention, for example, that you’ll have to do a lot of writing of different documents, maybe some briefings, lots of working as part of a team, etc. Which if they were writing a SOMC would be the essential experience requirement. But instead of writing a cover letter, you’re now going to tell them orally how you have experience that meets those requirements.
The position requires a lot of writing of different documents? You’ll outline the different types of writing that you have done and for whom. The position requires teamwork? Well, you’ll tell them about your experiences working as part of a team.
Seems straightforward, and on the surface it is. They ask you basic questions about your experience, and you answer them. No difficult questions or scenarios, it is all about your past experience. With a very open-ended question like, “Tell us about your experiences.” It will likely be that informal.
Under the surface, it is a bit more complicated. While you are talking, they are asking themselves three questions…first, of course they are seeing if you have the experiences they require. Second, they are asking themselves if you’re someone they want to work with in the future. Simple personality aspects. And third, are you a good fit for the team and the work?
Let me give you an example. I’ve been working in planning for awhile now, as well as lots of work in horizontal policy coordination. Lots of people with evaluation or research backgrounds often gravitate towards the area when they are looking for a change. Except the work environment is quite different. While an evaluator or a researcher might work on files with similar content, they often have one or two large projects and a six-month window (or longer) to deliver. The corporate policy and planning world is more dynamic. It has work schedules and file priorities changing rapidly and often. Which, to be honest, a lot of evaluators and researchers not only do not enjoy, but they also are often ill-suited to the work pace. It’s not their strength, experience or training. Some of them can do it, some of them can even do it well, but many are not happy doing it. Because it isn’t just a matter of “coping” with the high degree of uncertainty and change, as if it happens a couple of times a year, it is potentially several times a week.
So, when I am hiring, I often tell people that about the work we do. And see how they react. If they are stressed by the description, they will not be a good fit. If they tell me they can “cope” with it, I probe harder. I need to see some examples of where they have done it before and thus not only know what it’s like, but are still seeking to do it again.
For me, that’s a key “fit” variable. I need to know too that they will fit into the team, flexible, willing to share files, willing to cover for people if priorities shift. For my type of work, ownership of a file is frequently an illusion. For someone who likes having a project all to themselves, my team isn’t the right fit for them, and they are not the right fit for my team.
That isn’t cut and dried by any imagination of course. It’s more a feeling of whether they fit. Combined with the way they interact on an interpersonal level. How they describe their former jobs. What animates them in their descriptions, what they shy away from in other descriptions.
I absolutely need to know they can handle the job, sure, but I also need to know if I want them in the team at all. I’ll be even a bit more blunt. There are people who would be aces for the work content, but are absolute jerks to work with on a day-to-day basis. They’re borderline toxic. Why would I risk putting one of them on my team? It’s a lateral unadvertised deployment. We’re just having a conversation. I won’t pursue it, because I will see who else is out there.
Equally though, if you prefer solo projects and your potential future boss tells you the jobs is highly variable for work loads and file priorities are constantly changing, then that team is probably not right for you either. You’re also evaluating them…would I like the work? Would I like to work with this boss? Would I like to work with this team?
Now, as I said, the questions are almost going to be entirely about your past experiences. Which is a giant danger, because it can be rather dry and formal if you let it. You want this to be as close to a conversation as it can be. You want some back and forth. You want it to stay informal, because that’s how they’re going to see if you would work as part of the team.
Which brings me back to the reverse situation where they ask you to tell them about yourself before they tell you about the job. I mentioned you can invert that, put them back in the lead, and that works if you are risk-adverse.
Why might you leave it inverted? Because it is a highly-effective sales strategy to tell them about yourself and your interests before they tell you about the job. I call it the “reverse sell”, and I found it by accident.
About ten years ago, I was looking around for a change. I wasn’t a planner by trade, but I had done it in previous jobs, and I heard about a manager with an opening in another branch. I didn’t know them, they didn’t know me. I sent him an email, said I heard he was looking for a manager on the corporate side, and gave him a brief hook or two of things I had done, plus my resume. He suggested we meet, and it was right away. I agreed to meet, but I was taking a huge tactical risk — I knew very little about their exact work, or even their branch. I had some idea, but normally I would have done more research before going in to see him. With little time, I went in cold.
And he started with an inverted opening for me to tell him about myself. So I did. I talked about some of my previous experiences, and anticipating some of the type of work the jobs in his area would do, I mentioned things that I had enjoyed in previous jobs that were similar, without pointing it out. For example, I noted that I really liked the link between policy and programs. I had been doing high-end policy work for awhile and was looking for a change, something with more ties to programs, but I wasn’t looking to move into the “weeds” of running programs. All of this was true, I wasn’t lying, but I was selecting it because I knew that corporate planning often intersects with both policy and programs. And so I said I was looking for that and enjoyed it.
As he responded, he said that he too liked that aspect, and it was exactly what his division dealt with every day. He went on to explain the work they did, and how it related to what I said, and part of me was thinking, “Well, duh. That’s why I said it.” It was almost like I was applying to work at a carnival selling peanuts and I had said I liked selling things, particularly food, and the boss was explaining to me how that would be a good fit for me. Of course it would be, that’s why I said it.
Except a funny thing seemed to happen. While he was “selling me” on the job and how it fit my needs/desires, he was also selling himself on me. By inverting the order so I went first, the “selling” job was all his by going second and making the linkages for what the job was that he had to fill. He sold me, and he sold himself on how I would fit. It was the easiest interview I have ever had. I barely had to tailor any of my experiences to the job, other than presenting it well up front.
I have used the same technique in other situations, and it actually has some validation by classic “sales” techniques that are taught in business schools. But I just found it by accident, I wasn’t trying to game the interview. It just worked out really well.
So that’s it. You find out about a job opening at level, you see if they’ll meet with you, and you tell them about your experiences in as conversational a tone as possible. Maybe there’s a good fit, maybe there’s not. Or maybe someone else is a better fit.
If the fit happens, they can deploy you relatively quickly. Far faster than formal processes, which is why the option is so popular.
C. Formal deployment
The formal deployment interview is where the manager has advertised a position at level, and you have formally applied, often without knowing the manager or other staff in the area. The easiest example of this is where a manager at another department, say Environment Canada, has announced an AS-04 position as a deployment and it is open to those at level who work across the National Capital Region, and you work at perhaps Foreign Affairs and want to apply.
Maybe you have always wanted to work at Environment Canada; maybe you live on the Quebec side and would rather not commute across the river any more; maybe the AS-04 has some supervisory functions that you want to add to your resume. For whatever reason, you have applied because you are already an AS-04 and would like the job.
You will do the full cover letter approach described earlier — you will explain how you have the experience they are looking for, you meet the eligibility criteria, you have the education required, etc. But this is where it gets weird for the manager.
It isn’t a competition — you are already at level, so there is no “proof” required to show you merit the level, that’s already done. And, to be honest, it would put the government potentially in a weird position to have people go through a reassessment of their abilities again anyway … what would happen if you fail? Does that mean the competition was flawed, or that you really aren’t at level, or was it just you having an off-day? None of those are good outcomes. So you are already at the same level, full stop. The manager moves to the “best fit” criteria, right?
Which would mean they would call you in, ask you some informal questions (like the previous post), decide if you’re the right fit or not, and select someone. Easy peasy lemon squeezy. Which is also why deployments are popular with managers. They’re supposed to be easy.
Except I just ran an EC-06 full deployment process. I was fortunate enough that there were only a handful of viable candidates, and I interviewed all of them. No “screening” process — if they were initially eligible, as they were, I gave them a shot at the interview. Think of it as a very low bar on the experience criteria. I did have a fairly straightforward set of questions, three of them, and I asked each of them the same ones. Not formally written-out like a full rating guide, but they all got the same three questions. While all of the candidates were possible, i.e. they could all have done the job, one of the candidates was by far the most qualified for what I was looking for in this specific instance. I still had all three give me writing samples and names of references. I reviewed the writing samples, and the “strong” candidate was still in the lead, so I moved on to reference checks — which I only did for him. Because it is not a competition, I didn’t need to fully assess all the candidates.
In fact, I technically wasn’t assessing them at all. Not their knowledge, abilities, or personal suitability. They are already at level. So as a manager, I’m not supposed to “re-evaluate” them and asign scores.
Yet when I was done everything, and went to select the strong candidate, HR started asking me for copies of my rating guide, my score results, all the things I would do if it was a competition, but it wasn’t. I pushed back, and they said, “Oh right, you don’t need that, but it’s a good idea anyway, so give it to us anyway.”
And that is the weird part for the manager. I am legally barred by regulation and tribunal decisions from re-evaluating candidates, yet I also am supposed to provide some sort of formal “non-evaluation evaluation process” to select the candidates. Most HR people have no idea what that actually means so they default to asking for all the things in a competition. Equally, many managers get their advice from those same HR people and end up doing what they’re supposed to avoid — formally evaluating the candidates.
A friend of mine just went for what I thought was a competition, and I was advising her on all the steps (see next section) for a formal competition. Then, she said it was deployment at level. So I told her the steps from the previous section (informal). She did a hybrid of both, and it was a good thing because one of the first things they asked her was a very formal knowledge question. Something they are NOT supposed to do. If it even hints at a process that is re-evaluating candidates at level, it’s grounds to have the whole process tossed.
Yet many managers do it anyway.
Here’s what you SHOULD prepare for if it is a formal deployment interview:
- Review the knowledge elements and do some basic prep (sort of a lite version of the next section);
- Review the abilities and personal suitability elements, and have an example to use in conversation if they ask you about your past experiences (again, sort of a lite version of the next section); and,
- Prepare a couple of speech modules of your background — perhaps a 5 minute version and a 2 minute version of your “elevator pitch”.
Will that cover all scenarios? Not completely. If it is a job that you REALLY REALLY REALLY want, do the full prep of the next section, just in case. But most often, this should cover you in case the managers don’t know what they’re doing and “test” you on elements anyway.
D. Formal competition
When I started this chapter, I said there were five types of interviews. While that is true, it is also true that each of the five are variations on a theme — or, alternatively, across a spectrum. The formal competition interview is at the most extreme end of the spectrum, and requires the most preparation.
Normally, a “full” interview is when you are doing a full competition to get a job at a level higher than you currently are now or perhaps at the beginning of your career in order to get into the public service. Since you are not at level, the competition has to test you on all the elements in the poster to show you that you are capable of meeting each of the criteria.
As outlined previously, most of the “experience” and “eligibility” elements were tested during the upfront application process. Some of the knowledge was likely tested through a written exam, and some of the personal suitability elements will be tested through reference checks. This means that the interview is primarily about testing your abilities, as well as some personal suitability factors and potentially some knowledge.
But before you prepare for the content, you need to think about what you are about to do. They are going to ask you questions and then you’re going to answer, that’s obvious. And they’ll mark your answer, which is also obvious.
While the goal is always to make the interview seem like a comfortable conversation, remember that you are being marked for what you say. It is very formal. You can’t assume someone already knows something — if you don’t cover it, they don’t hear it to mark it. Take for example a situation where you have been giving briefings for some time. And you know that one of the most important things in briefings is to tailor your presentation to the audience. So you’re fully prepared to highlight that in your interview.
Then you get in there and realize one of the interviewers is an old boss from another division. One that trained you on how to do presentations, including to always tailor presentations. So you relax. They know you. They know your history. And so, if you are like most people having a conversation with someone you know, you may tend not to stay the obvious things that you both know to be true. You may even feel a little silly to say to an old boss, “Well, I believe the most important thing is to tailor a presentation to your audience.” Because he or she already knows that you know it. Which means, like many candidates in interviews with people they know, you may forget to mention something obvious. But if you don’t say it during the interview, you don’t get any marks for it. You are marked ONLY for what you say during that time.
And most important of all? It’s going to seem like a monologue. They ask you a question, and when you start talking, they shut up. They take notes on everything you say until you tell them (or it’s clear) that you’re done answering the question. It will NOT seem like a conversation, and the people doing the interview may not even make eye contact because they’ll be busy taking notes. It is very unnerving for some people. You need to know they aren’t being rude, they’re just taking notes. And they are NOT allowed to prompt you very much. If you miss a small element, they might prompt you to elaborate on something. But here’s the thing…if they prompt YOU, they have to ensure they prompt everyone. Or the process won’t be fair. So, rather than risk unfairness, they will NOT prompt you if you miss something, even if it’s obvious.
However, they do sometimes ask you if you have anything to add. That is NOT a prompt for you to actually keep talking or that you must have missed something..it’s more often than not just them making sure you are done with that answer and they can move to the next question.
So think about that…formal questions, formal answers, and you doing a lot of talking, likely with little interactions with the members of the board. Assuming a standard interview, your answer to an individual question will last somewhere between 5 and 8 minutes. Which means you are going to talk for on average 6 minutes without them saying anything. Can you do that without practice, in an organized fashion, without repeating yourself?
Most people cannot do it. They talk in circles. They get nervous. They repeat themselves. They start digressing. They repeat themselves again. And all the time the markers are listening to your answer and awarding points.
There are only three strategies to manage this challenge:
- Practice…you can practice talking about an area (see below) on your own or with a friend, you can participate in multiple competitions so you get experience in doing it, or you might even try joining something like ToastMasters;
- Prepare…you will see lots of explanation below on how to prepare your answers in advance so that you’re not trying to think on your feet; and,
- Structure your answer.
If structure is king for a written exam, it is queen for an interview.
You want to give an answer that is logical, easy to follow, detailed, well-developed, and answers all the elements that are needed for that question to get full marks. The markers need to take notes, and they’ll award your score based on the notes they take. If they have trouble following you, any trouble at all, you lose marks. It is that simple. So you need to always be clear with your answer — where you’re going, what you’re saying, when you’re done.
For example, if you start your answer by saying you have four parts, three phases, five elements, or even eight, they know that you are now going to tell them 3, 4, 5 or 8 things. And they are structuring their notes accordingly. They’re probably even organizing them already with numbers in order for 1, 2, and 3. You have already given them a logical, easy to follow structure. That’s half your marks right there. Now all you have to do is populate your answer. (To be frank, if you are going beyond 4 or 5 things in ANY answer, you’re likely too far into the weeds, but you get the picture.)
But fear not, intrepid candidate. Candidates have been given a small advantage since about 2004/2005. Since then, candidates are usually invited to arrive about 30 minutes ahead of the interview. What happens in that thirty minutes? They’ll put you in a room, take away your notes and any cell phones, etc., and they’ll let you look at the questions for 30 minutes. And let you outline your answers a bit, take some basic notes to guide your answers. Everyone thinks this is all about helping the candidate, but it is mainly to help the markers.
Before the candidates were given this type of 30 minute preparation/review period, they would just get the questions cold in the interview room. Spontaneous, everyone said. Deadly, the markers said. Why? Because people would do the same three things when the question was asked.
- Stall. Say things like, “That’s a very good question, thank you for asking. I think that is one of the most important questions you could have asked me. I’m really glad you asked me. In fact, I would have been surprised if you didn’t ask me that extremely interesting question. I think it is the core of the job, that question there.” Were they really that bad? Not all of them, but some were. They were just talking to fill space while they thought of what their answer would be.
- Pause. Some would also punctuate their answers with “er” and “um” as they stopped talking to think about what they wanted to say next.
- Repeat. This would be kind of like them saying, “Thank you for that question. I think the three most important things are A, B and C. So, yes indeed, A is important. B is important too. And so is C. Yes, C is very important. Linked of course to A, which is also important. But B is in the mix too. Yes indeed, C, B, and A are important. Did I mention B enough?” I exaggerate of course, but sometimes marking “spontaneous” answers seems a lot like that. They aren’t saying anything, they’re just repeating everything they already said. It still happens for another reason with the current process, but I’ll deal with that element later.
For now, rest assured, a good structure to each answer not only helps you as a candidate but also reduces the pain for interviewers of watching a candidate flounder simply because they didn’t have a good answer on the spot when they were in an artificial environment, under the spotlight, and nervous.
Let me digress to tell you about my interview with Foreign Affairs and how I found out about the importance of structure. It was under the old style, questions were not seen in advance, you just went in “cold” to the room.
I was given a scenario question where I was the Public Affairs Officer in Bonn, Germany, Rick Hansen was coming to town, I needed to organize an event, and I had no budget for it…what would I do? I started with the simple stall as I desperately tried to think of what to actually do. So I started with, “Well, I think the first thing I would do is check our files for similar events in the files to see if we had previous situations like this and how we handled them.” A nice conservative start, I thought. Except there was a woman on the board whose body language was EXTREMELY overt and easy to read. I actually saw her roll her eyes, so I knew it wasn’t the answer that they wanted.
I zigged sideways and started again. “Now let’s assume that I check the files, and I find nothing. No ideas at all, and I’m starting from scratch.” The woman almost dropped her pen. She smiled, looked up at me, clearly now interested. I had taken the question out of the comfort zone, and she was now ready to hear what I would really say.
Confession time. I might have zigged out of that first stalling hole, but I had NOTHING. No idea whatsoever. So I reached into my bag of magic tricks and said, “Let’s look at the question a little more closely. I have to have an event, and I can’t pay for it. But that can be nuanced three ways, and it gives me some ideas. First, one interpretation is that I can’t be the one to pay for the event, but perhaps I could find a sponsor. Perhaps there’s a disability association in Germany who would like to honour Rick’s work. Second, another interpretation is that I can’t pay for the event, but perhaps there’s an event we’ve already paid for where we could add Rick in some capacity. Perhaps there’s an event celebrating Canadian-German relations, and our special guest for the evening could be Rick Hansen! Third, if I go with the basic interpretation, i.e. that I can’t pay for it, and I can’t find a sponsor or another event, then it would have to be some sort of free event — which likely means something outside. Perhaps I could talk to the City of Bonn, try to recreate Man In Motion through the streets of Bonn, and get them to give Rick a key to the city.”
I confess, at the time, I thought that was the STUPIDEST answer I had ever given to a question. You might be thinking it’s actually not a bad answer, but I was already working for the department on contract and I knew lots of creative public affairs officers who would have laughed those options out of the room. So I knew the content was actually kind of weak, but I had nothing else to offer. Yet the woman with the expressive body language kind of nodded her head, and we moved on.
I didn’t make the pool, and when I went for an informal afterwards to get feedback on my performance, we came to that question and I cringed. I figured I might have got 3 or 4 out of 10. I was gobsmacked to find out my score had been 10/10.
I was pretty candid with the HR person giving the feedback and bluntly asked, “How is that possible?”. He looked over the notes and he told me that he remembered my answer as the ONLY one in more than 500 interviews that he had been part of where the candidate had actually had any sort of logical structure to their answer. He admitted that other people had more creative solutions, some had really grandiose plans, some were really impressive even. But it was like watching some sort of wild brainstorming exercise, thoughts all over the place. The interviewers often had trouble taking notes because they had no idea where one partial idea ended and the next partial or full idea started.
I had a good structure and somewhat average content, and I got 10/10.
Others had a bad structure and great content, yet failed the question.
Wow.
Such results aren’t often as startling now that people get questions in advance for 30 minutes, since they can use that time to create at least a basic structure, but structure still reigns. Repeatedly in interviews where I had weak content, I made up for it with a near-perfect structure. And received high marks because of it. And from the other side of the table, well-structured answers look downright awesome. As an interviewer, I sometimes feel like someone gave a great answer, yet afterwards when I look at only the content in my notes, it isn’t always as good as I first thought. But my first impression was that they had given a solid answer, easily passing the mark for that question. And I have never first thought someone passed and then subsequently failed them on secondary review. I might have lowered their mark from an 8 to a 7, but never below the line. And since marks are usually a consensus of the board, that isn’t just me being an easy marker…the other members of the board thought they were clear passes too, but in the final review, we might downgrade them to a more appropriate grade. Still a “pass”, but with some of the shine removed from a great structure. And some boards don’t even do that secondary review, they just go with their first impression.
Structure is queen, all hail structure.
However, once you understand those upfront elements, you need to prepare for four things in the interview preparations — knowledge, abilities, personal suitability, and what I call “extra” modules.
For the knowledge, it is exactly like the preparations previously described for a written exam. You’ll read the Departmental Plan (formerly Report on Plans and Priorities) to find out what is going on in the department. You may read recent statements by the Minister, particularly if they did any overview speeches with Chamber of Commerces. You’ll also need to refresh your memory of any of the special content / background documents you reviewed. However, there is a difference between the written and the interview. While the goal of the written was to have really detailed knowledge ready to “dump” into written answers, you are going to be using the info in the interview to populate some “extra” aspects of your answers. So you might get a question in the written exam where you have to explain the mandate and current priorities of the Department in detail in a memo, but in the interview, it is more like you will be asked to respond to a scenario of a new priority and how to handle it, and in your answer, you MIGHT want to drop in a reference to how this new priority fits within the existing priorities. You may not be getting a lot of points for “knowledge” in this part, but if you can throw it in, your answers are just automatically richer in content, and your overall score will go up. You’re just making your answers that much more concrete than without the knowledge. But if that is all you need, i.e. context, you’re more trying to drop in big headings in the interview, not the detailed sub-knowledge of each priority.
I do have one very large caveat to this comparison. I am basically saying that the written requires heavy knowledge content, almost an info dump, and the interview doesn’t, more the headings to help populate your answer a bit, make it richer. In the first instance, knowledge is the main course; in the interview, it is more like a mere spice to enhance flavour. However, this assumes that your competition had a written component that was separate from your interview. In other words, it assumes that by the time you get to the interview, you have already been tested on knowledge…but if you WERE NOT tested previously on knowledge, all bets are off in the interview. In that case, you WILL need to know all the detailed content.
When I applied to CIDA’s post-secondary recruitment, there was no written exam, and the first three questions of the interview were basically data dumps by the candidates to show the interviewers we had read all the priorities and could regurgitate them back in some form. And yes, that is as deadly as it sounds for both the candidates and the markers. Listening to the same answers over and over and over. It was even worse though because we didn’t get the questions in advance, it was just “enter and answer”. The first question I got was to outline CIDA’s six priorities. No indication of depth of answer required, no indication of what was to come. So I started answering. And I spent about 3-4 minutes on each of the six priorities to explain them in detail. Regurgitating what I had memorized. A complete brain dump. After my 15-20 minute answer, seriously, I stopped. I had no idea if that was too much or too short. They then said, “Okay, Question 2 is to take one of the six priorities and explain it in detail. You’ve already answered that, let’s go on to Question 3.” Oops. And Q3 wasn’t too far off some of the stuff I had already said too…I almost answered all three with my first answer.
Which is one of the reasons you get the questions in advance to review, so you can balance your answers better, but this type of answer is what I mean by the content required if you don’t have a written exam. If you have a written, that’s the spot for the detail; if you don’t have a written, the knowledge detail will be required in the interview.
For abilities and personal suitability, the possible questions seem endless. For example, if I’m running a competition and I’m marking initiative, and I ask you about a time where you demonstrated initiative, you might think that because everyone will have a different example, it’s impossible to figure out the question in advance. At first glance, lots of people think that way — because everyone has different answers, the question must be impossible to predict.
But it isn’t. It’s the same question. I’m marking X so I ask you to tell me of a time when you did X. And when five candidates answer that question, I am going to hear five different answers. But my marking grid, which I have to create in advance, has what I think is a generic answer that will allow me to mark everyone’s answer. For example:
- Did something that wasn’t assigned to them i.e. they initiated the activity;
- It wasn’t something they were expected to do as part of their job i.e. it was above and beyond or separate from their current responsibilities;
- It took some effort to do i.e. they had to figure out a way to do something or to do it better, something that wasn’t obvious, preferably something with options, and they had to make a choice / can’t be something really simple or obvious;
- There has to be a better result because it was done i.e. not just doing something different but actually improving something / so what; and/or,
- It challenged the status quo or was innovative.
So that’s my marking grid. Because that’s what initiative means. Which means when I hear the five different answers, I’m looking to see how many of those bullets you have. One or two? You probably fail. Three or more? Probably enough to pass. All five? High scores all around, well done!
Now let’s digress for a minute to look at those five bullets. Where did I get them from? Did I have some magical resource that exists only for managers? No. I have the same resources you do. Dictionary.com. Google. Thesaurus. Websites like Treasury Board’s that explain what initiative means as a competency or ability. And after you look at a few, you see some common denominators.
Initiative requires that YOU initiate. Lots of people will tell me of a project they led or we’re in charge of, and all the great things they did. Except they were told to do it by their boss. That’s not initiative, because you didn’t initiate; you maybe demonstrated management or leadership, but not initiative. The number of people who give leadership examples is astounding…close to almost 70% in my experience give a leadership example as they have never thought about what initiative actually means.
Or they say that they came up with a way to track all the correspondence in their unit in a special spreadsheet. Great. But what was their job? Correspondence manager. Someone who was expected to track the correspondence. It’s their job. So yes you came up with a tool, but you were kind of expected to do that anyway. It’s not anything “special” or “unique” or you showing initiative, you’re simply doing your job.
Often, too, people will talk about this fantastic thing they came up with as an idea, and yet it is extremely simplistic. For example, they were designing a new tracking system for urgent files, and they came up with the idea to use blue tags for correspondence and red tags for memos to allow people to triage the files quicker. Total time to come up with the idea and implement it? Thirty seconds. It was a good idea, but there was no effort involved. There were no real obstacles to overcome, no planning involved, you didn’t have to work at it. Which means as a demonstration of initiative, I simply don’t care about it.
Or the worst scenario? They’ll tell me how they completely revamped a system, because they thought it was fun to do, and when they were done, it made no difference whatsoever. No better outcome. No improvement in speed or result. No result other than that they did something different to fix something that was working just as well previously. I’ve even had people admit that after they left, their replacement dumped it and went back to the old way.
However, one thing that always looks good is if you were challenging the status quo or truly being innovative. Yet without those other four elements above, why will I care as an interviewer? Did you do a lot of work to improve something, or are you just someone who likes to spin their wheels doing things differently because they hate whatever is already in place and they just want to be “innovative” for no reason?
Ultimately, look at the answer grid. If you tell me that you set up a new colour code system because your boss told you to do it, it took you thirty seconds, it was different than what went before, but two months after doing it, they dumped it because it didn’t matter, how is that an example of initiative? Contrast that with an example where you’re perhaps in charge of finance, but you’re pretty good with Excel; you aren’t involved with the correspondence system, but you know they are over-worked and having trouble finding time to triage files properly or come up with a new tool; you suggest to your supervisor that perhaps you could take this on as a special project, and you study it for a couple of days or weeks and come up with three or four options but recommend one particular one that involves a new Excel file that you design and train people to use, along with a new colour coding system; it’s completely unique in the branch; and it works so well that response times are cut in half, your group is suddenly meeting all of its correspondence deadlines, you have a tool that generates reports for management, and other directorates or divisions are asking if they can have a copy of the tool to use in their offices.
If you contrast those two examples, which one do you think demonstrates initiative? As a marker, the second one gets 10/10, the first one perhaps 1 or 2, nowhere near a passing grade.
Now, you might suddenly say, “Yes, but I’m a junior employee, I don’t have the opportunity to demonstrate initiative, all my files are assigned to me.” That is absolutely a common problem. But it doesn’t mean you can’t give me an initiative example. You may have to give me one that was assigned to you, true. And as such, you’re not getting the points for coming up with it on your own. But if it took effort, if it was innovative, if it produced a good result, if you went above and beyond the tasking, then you’ve demonstrated the other four elements pretty well and you’ll get a good mark. Just be aware that in an ideal world, you don’t start off with that spot if you can avoid it. Or if you do, make sure you hit the other marks as best you can.
Going back a few steps though, the question was about initiative, but the context was whether or not you can predict the question in advance. Some people will tell you of course not, you’re not a mind reader.
But you don’t have to be. Here’s the magic trick. In almost 95% of all interviews that are asking about abilities or personal suitability, there are only three types of questions I am likely to ask you. Some call it past, present and future; some call it applied, situational or theoretical. I prefer to think of them as experience, process, and principles.
- Experience (or past or applied) — Tell me of a time when you’ve demonstrated strong interpersonal skills?
- Process (or situational or present) — Here is a specific situation, tell me how would your strong interpersonal skills help you to deal with it?
- Principles (or future or theoretical) — Why are strong interpersonal skills important to being part of a team?
When I do my presentations, people are almost shocked that there are only three types of questions. So they start trying to come up with scenarios or questions that would be a fourth type. Go ahead, do it yourself now. I’ll wait.
Now that I’ve hummed the complete soundtrack to Jeopardy, what have you got? Now take that question and ask yourself this…is it REALLY any different from one of the above three? Remembering too that the situation could be different, or your past might be different, or it says in a group instead of a team, but ultimately they are asking you to talk about interpersonal skills.
Remember above where I said they had a generic marking grid? They have it here too. For interpersonal skills. So no matter which answer you give vs. the next candidate’s answer, they can still mark both. So they googled “interpersonal skills” and came up with some headings. Like showing respect. Listening. Working together. Building trust. Clear communication. Transparency. And another four or five other possible headings.
Just for the sake of argument, let’s assume that I as the marker only decide to list three things about interpersonal skills — respect, trust and communication. Now, ask yourself…what is my marking grid if I ask you to tell me about a time when you demonstrated good interpersonal skills?
- Shows respect for others
- Builds trust with other people
- Clear recognition of the importance of communication
Now ask yourself…If I give you a situation where you are in a new team, there’s been some conflict, and I want to know what you’ll do to demonstrate good interpersonal skills, what does my rating grid look like?
- Shows respect for others
- Builds trust with other people
- Clear recognition of the importance of communication
Hmm, looks familiar. Now what if I ask if you think that good interpersonal skills are an important aspect of teamwork? What does my rating grid look like?
- Shows respect for others
- Builds trust with other people
- Clear recognition of the importance of communication
You’re not seeing double or even triple. It’s true. My rating guide for all three of those questions is (probably) identical. Oh, sure, I might have said “showed respect” in the first, and “shows respect” in the second, and “important to show respect” in the third, but it is the SAME rating grid.
Now, at this point, you know there are only three types of questions and you also know that I’m going to mark whichever one I ask (almost) exactly the same as the other two.
Doesn’t that sound like a question you can predict in advance?
Of course it does. Because I, as the hiring manager running the competition, am not a rocket scientist. I am not gathering magical information from the Oracle at Delphi to populate my rating grid. Instead, I’m basically doing the same thing you’re likely to do. Google it. Talk to other people about what it might mean. Come up with some headings. Put together an outline of possible things people may say. Call it done.
In the above example and summary, I keep saying that all three are “almost” identical, and they are. But there is a slight nuance difference.
In the first form of the question about experience, I need you to give me an example that shows those headings. In the second form of the question about a situation, I’m looking for the steps in a process that you’ll follow to show that ability. In the third and final form of the question, I need you to talk more about the principles involved.
But if you combine all three, you can create a single answer that answers all three and actually gives you more points for any of the three. Let me show you.
Suppose for example I ask you to tell me of an example where you demonstrated good interpersonal skills. You’re likely to immediately start with the context, what you did, etc. and tell me you showed respect, built trust, and emphasized communication.
But what if you started with, “I think the most important element of interpersonal skills is respect for other people. So the example I’m going to give you…”. Instead of starting with the details of what you did previously, you already are creating a great structure that says, “respect for others” and now your example is evidence of how you have done that exact heading. Then, as you go along, you might say. “After setting up those first few meetings and respecting what the others had to say, I felt it was important to start building trust with others.” Now you’re pulling from the process type response. And perhaps you finish with the experience example, “I really learned from this interaction the clear importance of communication, and I try now to incorporate it in all my interactions.” Wow, all three elements in the same answer.
Why would you do that? Because the first one is a basic answer. The second one is much more robust, more comprehensive, gives concrete examples, talks about principles and what steps you would take again, etc. And more robust while still maintaining a good structure means higher marks. Instead of getting 6 with your first example, you’re up into the 8 or 9 point range with a full answer.
Remember back in Chapter (x) where I said there was Secret Template #1? It is time for Secret Template #2. For every element that they are marking in the interview, you’re going to fill out the following table with short bullet points.
Experience | Process | Principles | |
Ability 1 | Position / Project 1
Position / Project 2 (Work / academic / volunteer) | Step 1
Step 2 Step 3 | Principle 1
Principle 2 Principle 3 |
Ability 2 | Position / Project 1
Position / Project 2 (Work / academic / volunteer) | Step 1
Step 2 Step 3 | Principle 1
Principle 2 Principle 3 |
Ability 3, 4, 5… | Position / Project 1
Position / Project 2 (Work / academic / volunteer) | Step 1
Step 2 Step 3 | Principle 1
Principle 2 Principle 3 |
Personal Suitability 1 | Position / Project 1
Position / Project 2 (Work / academic / volunteer) | Step 1
Step 2 Step 3 | Principle 1
Principle 2 Principle 3 |
Personal Suitability 2 | Position / Project 1
Position / Project 2 (Work / academic / volunteer) | Step 1
Step 2 Step 3 | Principle 1
Principle 2 Principle 3 |
Personal Suitability 3, 4, 5… | Position / Project 1
Position / Project 2 (Work / academic / volunteer) | Step 1
Step 2 Step 3 | Principle 1
Principle 2 Principle 3 |
See Annex 2 for a sample blank layout that you can use to populate your own info. Note that you do not want a lot of information, as you won’t be able to memorize it. I’ve listed 1 or 2 projects for experience, but ideally you can get it down to one really solid one that meets all your headings. For processes, I think in some cases it might be 4 or 5, but again, will you be able to remember them all when you get in the interview? And for principles, I like to stick to the rule of 3, as it is easier to remember those than it is for 4 or 5. And often if you are trying to do 4 or 5 principles, you’re too far into the weeds. Plus, if you did it right, you’ll be able to pull from ALL THREE columns for your example to create a really rich and robust response to whichever form of the question you get asked. So you won’t have room for two examples, five steps, and five principles in your answer. Keep what works, drop what doesn’t.
You’ll see in the above table that I have taken the identical approach to abilities and personal suitability. Some managers have noted that abilities tend to emphasize the experience and process/situational columns more so than principles, while personal suitability tends to use principle questions more often than experience or process. I tend to believe that is generally true, but I have no quantitative evidence to prove it one way or another. However, both abilities and personal suitability CAN ask any of the three types, and you need to be prepared, so I don’t recommend shifting emphasis in that fashion. Note too that you can expand the table if you want to include rows for the essential experience and knowledge, but the three columns don’t work as well for that. Essential experience is covered by the application, and you have a separate table to cover all the “experience examples” in more detail. For knowledge, you could put the knowledge factors down the left hand column, but usually you would be only using the process or principles at most, and highly dependant upon the type of job you’re doing (an FI might have some examples of where they used legislation, or the steps they used, or the principles behind the legislation, whereas an AS might have steps only). I think knowledge prep is mainly about the different types of documents referenced earlier, not putting it into a table like the two secret templates.
Finally, I said at the beginning of the chapter that there were four areas to cover and the one that is left is a heading for “extra” modules. If you did the work above, you know how to answer questions that fit 95% of the form you’ll see. Past, present or future, for example. You’re good to go.
Then you get in the interview and they ask you something weird. Something you are totally not expecting. And it doesn’t look like anything you have prepared. You start to panic. What do you do?
Well, remember how I said structure was queen? You need a structure to answer the question. Because a good structure is going to give you something to say, and it might be enough to get you half-way to passing the question. But what structure do you use for a question you weren’t expecting?
You are going to use one of the extra modules you can create to handle the unexpected. For example, if you google “problem solving cycle” or “steps”, you’ll see there are tons of examples. I like to cheat and look at the images tab to see what diagrams people have posted on various websites. Some will have 4 steps, or 5 steps, or 10 steps. It doesn’t matter which one you choose, as long as it is one you can understand and remember easily. I tend to think of problem-solving as having five steps:
- Define the problem
- Analyse the problem
- Develop options and choose one
- Implement the chosen solution
- Evaluate the solution
Now, if you are doing policy work, you should have the policy development cycle too. Search the same way. Guess what you find? The policy cycle looks pretty similar. Define, analyse, options, implement, evaluate. If you’re in project management, look at the project management cycle. Hey, almost the same. It’s not rocket science, they’re all pretty general and generic. So, how do you use them?
Let’s look back at that example of Foreign Affairs where I asked how to have an event for Rick Hansen when I had no budget. I had no idea how to answer, so I reached into my bag of magic tricks and pulled out the problem-solving cycle.
- Define the problem — Have to have an event and I can’t pay for it;
- Analyse the problem — Three possible interpretations — I can’t pay for it because I have no money, I can’t pay for this event but could pay for another, or I can’t pay but someone else could;
- Develop options — Free event, merge with existing event, find a sponsor
I didn’t have to implement or evaluate the options for that question, I just had to give ideas. But it was an unexpected question and I needed a good structure — so I used my “extra” problem-solving module to give me the headings to use.
While problem-solving, policy development or project management are relatively the same, there is no universal set of headings to “choose”. The five part option listed above is pretty standard, but if a model that has only four elements works for you, use that instead. It isn’t about the right answer per se, it is about you having some headings that will let you give a good answer to an unexpected question.
There are lots of little cycles like this that are good for various types of jobs. If you are applying for a stakeholder relations job, it is a good idea to memorize steps in a consultation process. If you are in HR, maybe the steps in a general job process. If you are in finance, maybe the headings for the typical budget cycle. A researcher might have headings around managing a research project. Things that resonate with them and they can adapt to other unexpected questions on short notice.
I also like to have in my backpocket some sample answers to weird and wonderful questions that someone might use as an icebreaker or part of another question. They can ask:
- How you are the best candidate?
- What is your past experience?
- What are your personal strengths?
- What are your biggest achievements>?
- How would this job relate to your career goals?
- What is your biggest weakness? (Very rarely asked, as difficult to mark) and what you are doing about it (obviously you will not give an example that something needed / relevant to the job!)
- What is a challenging project or situation with a difficult employee that you have dealt with?
- Do you have any good examples of teamwork or partnering?
- Tell us about your leadership style / communications style / personal values and ethics?
These questions are generally answered badly by everyone, so most managers never ask them. However, if used properly by the hiring manager, they can be good questions to use as icebreakers or just to see how they answer a difficult question in terms of communication styles, etc. I wouldn’t spend a lot of time on them, but their worth reviewing every so often.
For the summary of yourself or your experience, it can be the same summary for best candidate, past experience, personal strengths, achievements, weakness, etc. It’s up to you to decide how you want to respond, and again, they are not likely scored so there are no wrong answers in terms of an answer grid. They are really just trying to get to know the real you. And to make sure you’re not a general whackjob who says their greatest weakness is poor integrity or low attention to detail for a job that requires high values and integrity and a lot of precise details.
For me, I’m a manager, so I often get asked a general question about my management style. I’ll embellish a bit, and make it a bit more hypothetical, but I could say. “You know, I think my management style is tied tightly to my values and ethics and how I deal with other people. For me, it starts with respect for others. Embracing diversity, the use of french and english in the workplace, and a strong commitment to lifelong learning. But I think my biggest accomplishment as a manager has been tied to transparency. I focus heavily on sharing information when I can, and using that information to create a shared vision with my team that is clear and open, and I feel like I have had a lot of success with this in my last 10 years as a manager.” Off the top of my head, is that a perfect summary? No. But I can tweak it, practice it a bit, improve on the structure and then voila! I’ll have a handy dandy little speech module that I can use in different ways depending on what “weird” or “unexpected” question comes along.
Interviews are complex, and you need to be ready for all the parts that come your way.
E. Best Fit
At the beginning of the chapter, I mentioned there were five types of interviews, and the one that is left is what is called the “best fit” interview. This is the interview where they are seeing, amongst a small pool of fully qualified candidates, who is the best fit for the team.
Let’s go back for a second to an earlier example. Let’s say someone has a bunch of tech support workers working for them, and also say that they have three areas to cover – mainframes, PCs, and Macs. So they have an opening and run a selection process looking at experience in providing tech support, knowledge of various elements of different systems, abilities to be a front-line service worker and the personal suitability factors for dealing with a lot of different types of people all coming to you for help. Now suppose they have an opening, and have found three really good candidates who have been tested, evaluated, all good – any one of them could do the job. But there is only one position available. And you have to choose one that will fit well with your needs.
Suppose for example that you have existing workers who are really good with mainframes and PCs, but you’re a bit weak on Macs. And one of the three candidates is REALLY strong with Macs. Then you might choose them as the best fit for completely legitimate operational – yes, all of them are qualified, but this one brings a little extra experience with Macs to the table, and you’re short in that area. Tomorrow, someone might leave from the mainframe team and suddenly you’ll pull a mainframe person off the pool.
That’s partly what best fit is about – seeing which candidate fits your basic and extra needs the best.
But I need to warn you of something else. That previous example could have probably been decided just on paper. So why an interview? Often the processes are large and complex undertakings with lots of managers doing the interviews. So it is quite common for a hiring manager not to have seen EVERYONE that was interviewed earlier. They may not have met YOU for example. So if they are good managers, they’ll narrow the pool down to a potential sub-list that looks good and then call 3-4 of them in for a quick conversation.
What are they looking for? They’re making sure you’re not a whack job, for one. I’m not joking. Just because someone passed an interview or wrote a test doesn’t mean necessarily that you want to work with them on a day to day basis. Anyone can clean up nice for a formal process, answer the right questions in the right way, and maybe no alarms go off. But they’re a whack job. Look around your own work unit…chances are there are a couple of people you would rather not work with, but hey, somebody hired them.
The “nicer” way of thinking about this best fit interview is partly just getting to know you and partly to see how you interact on interpersonal skills in an informal setting. Are you shy? Are you aggressive? Are you constantly joking, are you deadly serious? They just want a feel for who you are, what you’re like.
Another area they want to gauge is how interested you are in the job. I know what some of you are probably thinking…what do you mean? We applied for the job, of course we want it, doesn’t every one of us want it the same? The short answer is no.
Some people applied just to be in a competition and hopefully make a pool so their own manager could pull them and appoint them where they are working now. They don’t want the job AT ALL. They’re just playing the game to get promoted.
Some other people are victims of time…they applied nine months ago but since then, their lives have changed. Maybe they have a divorce in the works, or a new baby, or a new boss, and they don’t want to move right now after all. They want to stay put. Or their boss has offered them another opportunity. Or they made another pool somewhere else, or are about to make one. Lots of things could cause them to change their minds since they first applied.
Are managers going to outright ask you if you still want the job? Probably not. They’re instead going to ask you to tell them a bit about why you want the job. Maybe ask you what elements in your past experience make you think you’d be a good fit. Ruh roh. Yeah, that’s right, it is still an INTERVIEW. And you need to be ready.
Your main focus is different though. Instead of knowledge or abilities or personal suitability factors, they’re mainly judging two factors – indirectly your experience (it will be what you use to populate your stories and flesh them out) and more directly your interpersonal skills.
But you have to make a choice at this point in how you choose to respond.
Some people will say, “If you want the job, you have to be the duck.” Just like in the rest of the competition. Don’t deviate from that message. What do you like about the job as a duck? Being able to quack. What did you like in your past jobs? Whenever you got to quack. Quack, quack, quack. You’re still going to answer the questions, but every third sentence should be about quacking. It’s safe, it’s conservative, it’s traditional.
However, what if you’re actually a swan? Then you have three options.
First, if you REALLY want the job no matter what, just quack. Less risk.
Second, if you want the job but you also want to be yourself, quack and also show off your swan features. Let your wings unfurl. Strut a bit. It’s a compromise of being true to yourself while still pursuing the job strongly.
Third, if you are interested in the job, but you aren’t going to be happy if you can’t be a swan, then fully unfurl and strut. You have to. Because you don’t want them thinking you’re a conforming duck and hire you into a job that is a bad fit for you.
But this also leads to some good news.
You get to interview them too. You can ask what it’s like to work in the unit. Chances are they will tell you anyway before you ask. They’ll often describe the job in detail, or the division, or the branch. They’ll give you a bunch of info you didn’t get reliably earlier…and you may or may not like it.
Some people have thought the job was like X and then found out in the best fit interview that it was mostly about Y. Which they had no interest in, and now they’ve wasted a huge amount of time to get that far and they’re not interested in the job anymore. It happens. Mostly to people who applied for anything and everything without finding out what the job was about at least in general terms.
You also get to see the manager and / or director in an informal setting and see if you want to work for THEM. You can see how they describe files, people, the work, etc, and decide whether there is a whack job in the room, and it’s not you.
Those are the basics, and the challenge for giving advice on this section is so many of the questions you might have are “what if…” scenarios. Too many to address in their entirety, but I’ll attempt to address some common general themes.
Option 1: What if I’m invited but I actually don’t want the job?
Remember all those other factors I mentioned above? Life happens. You can politely decline the best fit interview and say you’re not interested in the job at this time, with or without an explanation, no harm, no foul. They might be a little annoyed, but they’ll get over it. If you have something else, just say so and move on.
However, I advise against declining. First of all, they ran a competition, invested a lot of time and resources in it, and you DID apply. The least you can do is here their pitch at the end.
Second, you actually don’t know what they’re considering. Tons of pools get used to fill OTHER jobs than the first one posted. You might think it is about training programs, and you’ve decided it doesn’t interest you in general, but in reality, they have a new initiative looking at training geared towards gender equality that is one of your passions. You don’t know, and you won’t know unless you go and have that little interview. And after you hear from them, if you don’t want it, email them the next day and thank them politely for their consideration but tell them it doesn’t seem like the best fit for you at this time. Even if they offer you the job, you CAN say no.
Option 2: I had the interview, seemed to go well, and I want the job. Now what?
Ideally, they offered you it on the spot and you said, “Quack yeah!”. More likely, they said, “Thanks for coming in, we’ll let you know.”
But you should also give them an extra bit of info – you WANT the job, now that you’ve heard more about it and met your potential bosses. So email them the next day and say thank you for considering me, and that you remain very interested in the position if they think you would be a good fit in the team. Lots of people think this is redundant, but the reality is that it is new info for them. They may THINK you will say yes if offered, but they don’t know for sure – they know you’re interviewing them for best fit too. So telling them you’re interested (or very interested) lets them know that for sure if they offer you the job, you’re going to say yes. You’re a sure thing. All uncertainty is gone. And there is a small psychological element in there too – just like in dating or friendships, it’s nice to be wanted, and you’re telling them you want to work with them.
On both the upside and downside, their response will likely tell you which way they’re leaning. Now they may have to interview lots of others too, you can often tell by their response if it is GREAT, thanks for letting us know, or just okay thanks.
Option 3: I had the interview and I don’t want to even KNOW them, let alone work there
So email them the next day and politely tell them it doesn’t seme like the right fit for you at this time. No harm, no foul.
Option 4: I want the job, but one detail is a dealbreaker for me, when do I tell them?
The short answer is whenever you feel comfortable raising it. Not very helpful, I know. So let’s tease that out a bit more. It depends a bit on what the detail is about.
If it is about the job, you need to at least raise it as a concern in the best fit interview because that is pretty clearly linked to your best fit. For example, if you hate public-speaking and you find out that there is a component of that in the job and you didn’t realize that previously, try and probe a bit to find out how extensive it is. They’ll be able to tell that you don’t like or have a problem with that component and the conversation will address that to some extent.
Or perhaps there is a need to do a lot of outreach during the week, but every Tuesday at lunch, you are doing Toastmasters. You could mention that as something you do, and ask if that would likely be an issue. You aren’t trying to say “no”, because they’re not offering you anything yet to say yes or no to anyway, you’re just working out the ramifications of the job and another commitment you have. You can do all of this in the best fit interview.
However, if the detail is something about YOU, not the job, then you can wait for an actual offer before raising it. They’ll call you to let you know they want to choose you, at which time you can ask to meet to discuss a couple of issues you just want to clarify before you say yes fully. You’re still telling them it’s a likely yes, you just want to mention a couple of things.
Some of these things might be highly personal. For example, suppose you have to pick up your son every Tuesday at 4:00 without fail. It’s not an everyday thing, as that could have been discussed at any time in terms of the workhours for the team, etc. Instead, this is a dealbreaker for you. Will that be a problem? Usually it isn’t. But you want to know before you say yes.
Or perhaps you have a one-week trip planned in six months where you’re taking your great grandmother back to the home country. It’s planned, booked, and you’re going no matter what. If it is that important to you, you may say, “Is this oging to be a problem?”. Usually not, particularly with advanced notice, but this category is about something YOU decided was a dealbreaker for you, so you need to know if it is a problem or not.
After that, there are a huge number of potential really personal issues you might want to raise. Maybe you have a religious ritual that you do at certain times each day, and while they’ll accommodate you, maybe you want to know it isn’t simply accommodations but they are actually supportive and would never ask you to do it after you finish some urgent task. Many of these areas could even get into questions of human rights, but you want them to know before you start.
Which takes me back to the original response. Tell them what you want to tell them when you feel comfortable doing so.
Now, lots of activists out there will tell you that you don’t need to share, and I agree. You don’t HAVE to tell them. But you also don’t want to necessarily be faced with having to fight for something with neanderthal bosses…you want to know their views before you accept.
For me, it is the blog I write. I tell them in my best fit interviews, if not earlier, that I have a blog. And give them the URL if they want to check it out to see the types of things I write. Am I allowed to have a blog? Yep. Does that mean a boss might not give me a hard time about it? No, they could, and if that’s their attitude, I want to know that before I agree to work for them…mostly because I won’t accept the offer. I’m also going to feel them out about HR, training supports for employees, ways to approach certain types of situations. And all of that will be informally during the best fit because that is where I feel comfortable sharing it. Others might wait for an actual offer, but to me, that’s a waste of time. But I’m also not looking for just “any job” or trying to get a promotion. I will only accept jobs that are the right fit for me.
Hi Paul,
I hope you are having a great day!
Thanks for providing such a resourceful website.
I have utilized all your tools so far and finally moved from the exam stage to the interview stage.
For context, I was tested on my knowledge and competencies through the job application & an exam. I have also not been told about the specific team/unit; I know the department.
The subjects I will be tested on are called C1, C2… etc., and they basically just outline four of the six competencies in the job posting.
Now, since I am only going to be tested on the “C’s,” which I am guessing means competencies:
– Do I need to read the departmental results report?
– At this point, I have not been tested on anything specific to the department. Will there be a future test on this?
– Since I have identified that I will be tested on four things and it will be a 30-minute interview, what is the best way to prepare? Will it just be to prepare 6-minute answers to address each competency with examples after googling headings?
– Should the job application I submitted be a guide for preparation? For example, the questions I answered showed the competencies I would be tested on.
– This is my first time doing this type of interview. Do they have the typical tell me about yourself at the beginning?
– What is an example of how we show integrity and respect as public servants daily? I looked through your blog and know you mentioned the TBS website. Could you provide an example to help me think more concretely?
Hi Georgina,
Congrats on getting through the application, knowledge and written exam!
Let me step back a moment for terminology. So, different departments and HR people will refer to things a bit different. For example, in a job poster, it might have:
EXPERIENCE — and list three things…which get referred to by most as EX1, EX2, EX3
KNOWLEDGE — and list two things…K1, K2
ABILITIES — and list four things…A1, A2, A3, A4
PERSONAL SUITABILITY — and list two things…PS1, PS2
You’ve already been tested on Experience (your application) and knowledge (your written exam). Now they are giving you an interview…
Most HR people would stick with the original abbreviations, but some departments find that their candidates then write back and say, “What does A1 vs. PS1 mean?”. So they use C for competency, which includes K, A, and PS together.
So, yes, they are going to test you on are competencies… and ONLY those four competencies. With that in mind, let’s turn to your questions, although I’ll do it out of order.
5. INTRO — “Tell me about yourself” is total coin flip if they will do that or not. On the positive side, some people like to ask it as they think it helps put the person at ease. On the negative side, it takes time in your 30m AND none of it is “markable”, it’s just chit chat. None of their C1, C2 competencies include “tell us about yourself”, so whatever you say is nice to know, but most managers skip it. They often forget that people may never have gone through such an Public Service interview before, and “jumping in” may throw them off if they’re not expecting it. In my experience? It’s probably 60/40 that there won’t be an intro question. They might explain how it works and then ask if you have any questions, but that’s about it.
3. BEST WAY TO PREPARE — Yes, generally, as you outlined, about six minutes worth of material to respond to whatever they ask, using the googled headings. Note that it might be 4 separate questions, or it could be 3 plus an oral communications (that is marked globally overall for all your answers) or it could be 2 that has 2 competencies included each. I bet it’s 3 + oral, a standard format for external hires.
4. IS THE JOB APPLICATION WORTH READING — No, and yes a bit. No, because it isn’t about that, it’s about the 4 competencies. However, “yes” to the extent that you already went through your background and pulled out good examples to put in your application. As such, those examples are the best things to include as your examples to demonstrate what you’re preparing in #3 above.
1. DEPARTMENTAL RESULTS REPORT / 2. TESTED ON THE DEPARTMENT
You have been a busy little candidate, haven’t you? 🙂 You even know the DRR exists. I have two completely different views about the DRR and the departmental stuff. Your first priority is to know about the competencies they’ll be testing…if it doesn’t mention knowledge of the department, you don’t need it. They can’t ask you for stuff that isn’t being tested. Similarly, they’ll rarely ask you anything knowledge based that wasn’t in the written portion, so no, unless there is something in the 4 competencies that mention the department, I doubt you’ll be tested now or later. On the other hand, let’s say you have a good economics degree and you’re applying to be a policy analyst at Fisheries. While you may just want a job, and that was the dept hiring, it cannot hurt you to have some idea of what the dept does, how it’s structured, what it’s general priorities are. Not to be memorized, but just to back up your studying. Take for example a general question about how you would work with people in your team. And you are able to throw in something like, “Well, I really like to respect a diversity of opinion, so I would want to understand how people bring their expertise for Fisheries on all three coasts to bear on this problem. Maybe some of my teammates are from the East, West or North and have more direct experience with the impact of the fisheries industry on the local economy.” It isn’t required, but it doesn’t hurt for you to know SOMETHING about what they’re doing. Just don’t try to pretend you know EVERYTHING there is to know, just be able to sprinkle some of the knowledge in. Not a high priority, but I find it helps. The other thing you can do is look for Ministerial speeches to Chambers of Commerce — they often give their “intro” speech about “here’s what my dept is doing” which is more detailed than their intro in the DRR, but not as long as a full DRR!
6. AN EXAMPLE OF INTEGRITY AND RESPECT
You already found the TBS website (wow, you REALLY did read the guide, didn’t you? I’m impressed, you seem VERY ready!) and will ahve seen examples of behaviour at various levels down to supervisor.
For the supervisor, it lists nine positive behaviours, and I’m going to highlight :
– Values and provides authentic, evidence-based advice in the interest of Canadians
– Carries out decisions in an impartial, transparent and non-partisan manner
Those are pretty common to all levels — we need facts, not theories; evidence, not opinions. And we don’t care who was elected to power when it comes to doing our job…in theory, at least, our advice is the same. We look at an issue, we find the best research, pull out the conclusions and test against our own research/data, and make recommendations that are logical, connected to the evidence, and without personal bias. So you come up with an example of how you would ensure you do that? Like researching neutrally, challenging biases of all findings, staying impartial. You’re the “scientist” of policy, for example, viewing results in terms of what is best for Canadians?
Now, that can often be too generic for some people who are outside govt. Impartiality may not resonate with the candidates. However, if you look at the 9 behaviours again, and look at these ones in particular:
– Implements practices to advance an inclusive, healthy organization, that is free from harassment and discrimination
– Promotes and respects the diversity of people and their skills
And sees that in the examples “ineffective behaviour” that mention:
– Mistreats others
then you may have stronger resonance with the idea of how you work with others. Such as respecting diversity of views with coworkers, respecting the lived experiences of clients (like persons with disabilities), giving voice to the voiceless, etc. … either externally with clients or internally with your coworkers. In effect, finding an example where you were warm, inclusive, open-minded, respectful in a situation that might have been challenging, dynamic, even potentially confrontational. Often new hires use examples of group projects where OTHER members were in conflict (never themselves!), and the candidate was Mother Theresa, Ghandhi, and Oprah Winfrey rolled into one. I’m a little irreverent on this one as it is really easy for some people who are talking about their examples to forget that it isn’t about virtue signalling, it’s about a professional inclusive interaction with others that creates better results.
Hope that helps. But honestly, you’ve learned the lessons well, young grasshopper. 🙂
Good luck!
Paul
Hi Paul, I love your blog!
I have my first formal interview coming up and I will be assessed on the following merit criteria. Do you have any pointers for me?
Ability to work as part of a team in a dynamic environment with multiple assigned projects and/or tasks
Strong client service skills
Ability to communicate orally
Effective interpersonal skills
Team Leadership
Thanks in advance.
Hi Matt,
As you’ve seen from the guide, my approach is generally to take each of the headings, look up what a generic description is for them, come up with reasonable headings to explain it, and match your prep to three possible questions using those headings (past/experience, present/situational, future/abstract).
So for client service skills, you’ll want things like respect, listening, all the things that help you respond directly to the real needs, soliciting feedback, etc.
It’ll be quite similar for effective interpersonal skills, although the first is more “outward” facing towards the public while EIS is often asked more about interacting with team members and would go well with the first one (working in a team, sharing work, interrelated projects and tasks).
The only one that might not fit that mould of prep is the communication one…it is usually a generic overall mark and in the guide I outline some basic elements of what they’re looking for i.e., good structure, understandable, clear, direct communication, vocab and grammar appropriate to the situation, etc. Which is why I emphasize structure above all…a clear structure, without repetition, gets you 90% of the way there on Comms ability.
Good luck!
Paul
Hey there!
Such a nice and well structured blog, thank you Paul for sharing your invaluable tips.
One area that I struggle with is towards the end of the interview, when I get asked what are some questions that I might have. In rare occasions, I had no questions at all but also wanted to wrap up the interview on a high note.
In your experience, what is something that a hiring manager would like to get asked or what are some questions that would leave a great impression?
Hi Jay,
Jumping straight to the Q, don’t stress about it. Lots of people think this is an opportunity to knock their socks off, impress them with your keen insights, etc. Nope. They’ve finished the interview, they’re not looking to have a lovely conversation with you about the job, what it looks like, or much of anything else. Those can be discussed later. They’ve finished the formal interview, your marks are set by what you’ve said, you’re done. There’s no brilliant Q that will impress them, but lots of people will ask stupid questions that look like suckup questions and actually hurt instead.
One of the most popular for private or public sector is something like, “Can you tell me what a typical day would look like in your unit?”. But here’s the thing. If you’re a solid candidate, you should already have some idea from what you’ve already read. If you don’t, this either looks weak or a suck-up. Another popular one in the private-sector that some people use is, “What would success look like in the first year if I was the one chosen?”. Again, this looks and sounds ridiculous in the public sector. The real response is “You do your job well.” People don’t have time for playing games in this. Most govt jobs and processes are linear. They’ll answer your Q, but you could just as easily leave that to a best fit interview where you tell them about yourself informally and they tell you about the specific job. The hiring managers are likely hiring for a bunch of positions, so asking at the formal interview will get you generic descriptions of what an AS, PM or EC does.
There are two exceptions to this. First and foremost, if the ones above are real questions that you have, and you want to know NOW, then say to them something that makes it real. For example, “In my present job, I do a mix of stakeholder relations, liaison with operations, and policy updates for my director. But the majority is the stakeholder relations file. I understand the new job will have a mix of similar responsibilities, and I’m curious if you have a sense of which types of activities would get the most attention in the coming year.” This GIVES them info about you, shows that you have THOUGHT about jobs and what they do, and are genuinely curious about what it looks like for them. It’s not a throwaway question, it is a contextualized enquiry that is relevant to you.
Second, if you have another question that is burning a hole in your brain, find a way to ask it. Real questions are generally good, just above.
There are some caveats of course. You don’t want to ask them if they validate for parking, for example. Not a real example, just the type of thing to avoid. You can ask them real Qs about the job, if/when you get it, but not about simple administrative stuff. That’s for the HR people, not the managers. In brief, you can ask them Qs at the same level that they asked you. Likely higher-level professional stuff, not process trivia.
If you absolutely 100% want to ask about next steps or timing, well, you CAN, but if you do, one positive way to ask the question is a bit of context. “I know you’re interviewing a lot of candidates and there are multiple steps, scheduling issues, etc. so you likely don’t have a precise timeline. But I was wondering if you had a tentative timeline by which you hope to have the process all wrapped and in a position to start staffing?”. The tentative part, the dynamism, the delays, all of that is acknowledged so they aren’t being held to a date, just asking if they have ideas. If you ask for a date, they’ll say “it depends” and might give some general indication. If you word it softer like above, it isn’t asking about any steps, just the overall process. Some people go a bit more pointed and ask what a potential start date would be, but I think that is too pointed, myself.
Good luck,
Paul
Hi Paul. Thanks for your guide, it really helped me through competitions!
One thing I’m struggling with is sub questions – such as when a question has multiple questions under it, and you have to tackle every element. It is sometimes difficult to combine that with a STAR approach, without going all over the place. What would you recommend?
Hi Lex,
This is a good example of why I don’t like the STAR approach. People start to think about “How do I do STAR for multiple examples, etc.” when you SHOULD be focusing on what the common elements of the categories are FIRST and then matching your examples to it in a way that it covers all of them. Take for example judgement, focus on results, and analytical thinking with initiative.
1. Judgement — likely some combination of understanding situation, identifying key features, weighing evidence, making a decision, implementating and adjusting
2. Focus on results — evidence-based, key elements, clear line of sight from beginning to final goal, etc.
3. Analytical thinking — evidence, research, informed elements, considering upstream and downstream activities, short-term and long-term, etc.
4. Initiative — decision, effort, consideration, implement, results
STAR isn’t going to line up with those headings very well. However, if you “merge” it into a series of elements, maybe you get:
A. Research options to understand situation, including upstream and downstream, ST and LT
B. Identify key features, weighing the evidence
C. Consideration
D. Make a decision
E. Implement/Effort
F. Adjust as you go
G. Better results than not doing it
Now you’re looking for examples that fit THOSE combined headings rather than focusing on the example’s STAR headings.
Hope that helps, and good luck!
Paul
Hi Paul,
Thank goodness I found your blog ,right after my application was retained. Nevertheless, I started reading from the introduction on…Now I am called to a pre recorded interview ! 1st time to hear about that. I am nervous and not sure how to prepare myself. You spoke about many qualification points It’s a EDS 3 Job. assessing:
Ability to communicate effectively orally
Ability to collaborate with internal and external partners/stakeholders
Ability to apply adult learning and instructional design principals in designing learning interventions
Judgement
Initiative
Creativity
Strategic thinking
SOS please ! suggestions, examples and recommendations are appreciated. THANK YOU!
Hi Zado, as you saw in the guide, there’s no magic element for each of those, you basically do two things:
1. First figure out what the heading can mean (google the phrase, even use dictionary or thesaurus) with some sub elements
2. Review your work history to see what you would use that would best hit those elements.
The example in the guide of initiative is the easiest to understand. If you google it, and look through some elements, you’ll see that some common elements are:
a. Make a decision
b. Do some planning/make an effort/consider choices/try to innovate
c. Implement with some adjustments
d. Focus on better results than if you didn’t do it
So then you have your first headings for initiative…you just have to think of an example of your work that fits those general headings.
Then go through the other headings and come up with similar sub-headings. Good luck!
Paul
Hello Zado,
I’m curious to know how the pre recorded interview was. I was invited for one interview at IRCC that has a similar assessment criteria: Judgement, Initiative and Strategic thinking and I’m unsure on how to structure a message. Any suggestions and experiences would be a great help. Thanks!
I don’t know if Xyn will see your comment or respond, but I’ve approved it…
Paul
I found it weird to talk to the camera! I am not good at all with selfies and pausing :)Thank you Paul for all the guidance you provide here.
I followed STAR strategy and I felt it worked. At least, I was prepared for that. They specified they want ONE example. So I followed Paul ‘s suggestions in his response, took an example of an initiative and
1. Identify need
2. Research best practice
3.Collaborate with stakeholders
4.Results
Paul, what do you think?
Good Luck Xyn!
Sounds good Zado!
Hi Paul
Thank you very much for your guide. I wonder if I could pick your brain on an interview process.
Have you heard anything about the RPL (recruitment of policy leaders) interview process? My understanding that is very unique and different from typical interviews. Can you potentially share how to best approach something like this, or how to be the best version of myself in this process? E.g., supplementary readings, variance in your interview guide vs. this unique situation? There isn’t much information on this.
Hi Jason,
I know only some of the interview stuff as I confess that I’m not entirely a fan of the RPL, as you’ll see from some of my comments. Basically, depending on the batch, the interviewers are often very high-level executives — DMs, Senior ADMs, etc. That’s great in one sense, and terrible in another…most candidates coming in are going to be ECs, and the EX-05s and DM-02s haven’t directly managed an EC-05/06 usually for at least 10 years. They really have no idea what the day to day job is anymore.
But what do they look for in a “policy leader”? Somewhat incredibly bright, articulate, good on their feet for active communications…one technique they like to use is to ask you a question, let you get 10% into your rhythm and then throw a curve at you to see if you get flustered and shut down or keep going. People who are really good at debate do awesome in this type of interview. But it also puts a bias towards analytical extroverts at the expense of the people skills you often see in emotive introverts, so depending on your personality, you may have to LOOK LIKE an extrovert even if you’re not. Are they impressive? Yep. People who got high scholarships, internships, high fliers, type A personality, etc. — so they are expecting people who will speak up, speak clearly, etc. No holding back. A calm collected answer will lose out to a passionate answer delivered with confidence. I rarely would say this for any other interview besides COMMS, but a key ingredient will be energy. Bottomline — you can’t be flat. You don’t have to be bouncing off walls, but your personality should fill the space.
Hope that helps, let me know how it goes…
Paul
Hi Paul –
Thank you very much for your insights! Another quick follow-up: based on your experience, what is the best way to approach the prep for this interview? E.g., background reading (it says dynamic policy discussion, but not on what), type of questions (are they still likely to be the regular formal interview based questions?)
Thank you again
Hi Jason,
For RPL, my understanding is they like to throw Qs at you for the policy discussion around the broad GoC themes. So housing, Pharmacare, sustainable jobs, etc would all be good candidates. Reading through the Fall Economic Statement, Speech from the Throne and last budget would likely situate you well.
Paul
Hi Paul
Thank you so much for this. I feel like I just hit the lottery finding your post. Reddit can sometimes pan out, sometimes. I have a few questions: I have a formal interview in 2 weeks. This whole process is entirely new to me and as you already highlighted in your post, I’m a nervous wreck. Criteria to be assessed:
1. Thinking things through
2. Demonstrative integrity and respect
3. Working effectively with others
4. Showing initiative and being action-oriented
5. Ability to communicate effectively
I have been able to follow your rubric and come up with example for criteria 3 & 4 and I guess 5 will be assessed during the interview. I’m struggling with 1 and 2 and for the life of me Google is not helping me with these criteria. Do you have any thoughts or suggestions? Also, do the interviewers judge demeanor or pace of speaking? I’m a really fast talker and nerves make it worse and I use a lot of filler “erms” and “ums”. I’m so worried this would affect my overall performance. Thoughts?
Hi Bubu,
Glad it’s helped so far. I’ll start with your last question re: whether they judge demeanor / pace of speaking. The answer is, sorry, yes to both, although perhaps not in the way you expect. If you answer a question in the form of “I, errm, think, umm, that, errm, umm, I think, umm that people, errm,” etc., then you’re virtually incoherent and you’ll absolutely fail on communications. But you’re also going to fail every other element too because if your speech is so problematic as to impede communications, they probably won’t understand what you’re saying on anything else. So, the issue is not so much that you say it or do it, it’s whether it impedes communications. So, equally, if you speak at 1000 km per hour and they can’t understand you, yep, you’re going to lose marks. Not because you’re speaking fast, but because it affects understanding, communications, etc.., and they won’t understand your answers.
So, what does that mean? It means you know it’s a problem and you need to remind yourself to slow down. A friend of mine speaks really fast when nervous. So when she’s making notes to herself about what she’ll say in the interview, the first thing she does is write in big capital letters, SLOW DOWN. She also decides that whatever she’s asked, she’s going to count to 3 or 5 or whatever before she answers. So that she knows before she opens her mouth that she can control herself. She’s not letting anxiety dictate her speed, she dictates the speed. Thirdly, lots of people speak fast because they want to “get it all in”. More is not better. Good is better than more. As an aside, I talk fast in situations where I don’t know what to say — in interviews, I prompt myself to stick to whatever outline I create for that answer. I do NOT go beyond it. Similarly when being tested for French, I absolutely restrict myself to 3-4 sentences per response. I do not blather on, even though I could. And on a related note, particularly common for those who speak fast when nervous, DO NOT repeat yourself. It’s a nervous tic, people frequently go back and say it all again. Repeating yourself loses points. If you’re worried, practice ahead of time. Load up a video program, and ask yourself, “Tell us of a time when you had to work effectively with others”. And then record yourself answering the questions. Nobody can fix your quirks — only you can do that. Most of the time, it’s nowhere near as bad as you think. Umm or erm between sentences is not bad, between subphrases, it is. Programs like Toastmasters can help you deal with it if you can’t get it under control yourself.
For integrity and respect, if you go to the Key Leadership Competencies on the Treasury Board website, it lists the following behaviours for the lowest level they mention, supervisor:
Values and provides authentic, evidence-based advice in the interest of Canadians
Holds self and the organization to the highest ethical and professional standards
Models commitment to citizen-focused service and the public interest
Supports the use of both official languages in the workplace
Implements practices to advance an inclusive, healthy organization, that is free from harassment and discrimination
Promotes and respects the diversity of people and their skills
Recognizes and responds to matters related to workplace well-being
Carries out decisions in an impartial, transparent and non-partisan manner
Engages in self-reflection and acts upon insights
All of them are relatively generic, you can use them at any level. Might need to adapt a bit. They also list ineffective behaviours:
Places personal goals ahead of Government of Canada objectives
Shows favouritism or bias
Does not take action to address situations of wrongdoing
Mistreats others and takes advantage of the authority vested in the position
For each of those, just write them as the opposite and you’ll have headings you can work with.
For thinking things through, I don’t know what you googled, but if you put “thinking things through” in quotes, and / or add “definition”, you’ll get several examples come up, most of them GoC websites. I like this one from Statistics Canada:
Considering multiple sources of information before formulating a view or opinion.
Exercising sound judgment and obtaining relevant facts before making decisions.
Analyzing setbacks and seeking feedback to learn from mistakes.
As a small humourous counterexample, there is a scene in the second Dark Knight Batman series where someone who works for Wayne Enterprises knows that Bruce Wayne is Batman and wants $$ to keep it quiet. He talks to Morgan Freeman’s character who responds, “Let me get this straight. You work for one of the wealthiest men on the planet and you believe that every night, he goes out as a one-man vigilante who beats criminals to a pulp with his bare hands. And your plan is to blackmail him?”. The following line is “Good luck with that” but almost everyone thinks he said, “You didn’t really think this through, did you?”. If you do the “opposite”, it’s making quick judgements, responding quickly without considering the consequences, not weighing evidence, never looking back on your decisions to see if you screwed up. Even successes can always be done better, so TTT is often looking for you to do the above hits from StatsCan. You could maybe add elements around weighing factors; considering short-term and long-term implications; ensuring you understand an action before acting, BUT NOT delaying action until you have PERFECT info, you still have to make a decision, even if imperfect information, etc.
Hope that helps…
Paul
Greetings Paul,
Can’t thank you enough for the wealth of knowledge that you shared with all of us through this website. Appreciate it.
I have an interview coming up early next week. I understand how to structure my answer around important headings if given a situation-based question, however, I’m struggling with the “experience/past” type of questions. For example:
Tell us of a time when you had to work with a difficult coworker/boss. (Competency: Working with others)
or Tell us of a time when you demonstrated client focus. (Competency: Client focus)
Given the very limited amount of professional experience I have, I literally can’t think of any experience worth sharing in the interview and I don’t want to make up a story. My mind just goes blank. Do you have any insights for a person like me on how to approach these questions nicely when lacking actual examples? I apologize if this seems like a silly question to you.
Any help would be greatly appreciated!
Thanks.
Hi Renu,
It sounds like you’ve got a good handle on structure, which is good. For content, a lack of professional examples to use usually comes from one of three possibilities, two kind of thoughts and one more practical.
First and foremost, it could be an entry level position. Lots of new graduates are in that world. Some have never had a job before. They were a student for elementary, a student for high school, a student for university, no jobs in there and now they’re graduating. If this is the type of job, then the good news is that (not quite but almost) EVERYONE has similar challenges. They don’t have 10y to rely on. So, the markers know that. They will adjust their scoring accordingly. But wait, there’s more 🙂
Second, if it isn’t entry level, but you don’t have much work experience, well, the cold reality is that it is possible that you aren’t qualified. I don’t mean that to sound harsh, just practical. Back in about 2004 or so, I was screened in for an executive job. Why? Because I write a really good application and they set it up as a bad set of screening variables. I then wrote the exam, and I aced it, beating out a lot of more senior / more experienced people who just didn’t know how to write a good exam. But in the interview, it was clear that the DG was pissed. He didn’t want to waste time interviewing me. I was clearly NOT ready, which I agreed with, I was doing it for the experience. But when I got to the interview, I couldn’t answer all the questions equally…of seven Qs, there were two where it asked us to describe an experience where we had led a department-wide project. I had only 2, so I used it for Q3 and Q6, my big 2 experiences. Which left me very little to talk about for Q1,2,4,5,7. Yes, you can reuse, but at that level, they’re looking for breadth and depth, and I had neither. I bombed, as expected. If I was to do the same thing now, I would have lots of examples. Soooo, if you don’t have much experience and the interview requires it, maybe you aren’t properly matched yet. You can still try of course, but it wouldn’t be surprising if you were limited in experience and applying for a job that would normally have 5-10y before starting. It isn’t a failure if you don’t make it through, could just be a learning experience for higher levels, as it was for me in the EX process.
Third, and this is far more practical, is that people who are struggling with what to say are often doing it wrong. So, for example, “dealing with a difficult client”. “I’ve never done that!” would be a typical response. Except, is that ACTUALLY true? There is NO scenario in your life where you tried to help someone who was difficult? Maybe you have to adapt some work you were doing in high school, helping another student, informally tutoring maybe; or maybe you did some volunteer work. Or you were providing advice to a tourist on a corner. Ideally, yes, you pull from a professional experience. Ideally, it is one complete example that hits all the elements. But if you truly do not have ANY aspect of that in your work life, then modify your search parameters…maybe it’s not YOU dealing with the client, maybe you were helping someone deal with a client; maybe you were helping someone that wasn’t being difficult, but there were complex and sensitive elements to it; maybe they weren’t a “client”, maybe you were helping a friend. Or, going to the “secret template #1” that I mentioned in my guide for the experience application, can you cobble together multiple elements across multiple smaller experiences to make it look like you’ve done it?
For example, I often mention a question like “Tell us of a time when you had to manage financial resources…”. Lots of people have NEVER done that for work. Or not their govt job anyway. But let’s see, you did:
– Work as a waiter or cashier in high school
– Collect money at the local fair for a kissing booth
– Sell raffle tickets for church
– Had a paper route
– Researched how much it would cost to hire a driver for an event at your local community centre
– etc. etc. etc.
If you cobble a bunch of smaller examples together, even if they’re not all work, you can often “simulate” a full answer. I hesitate to call it faking an answer, because it’s all true. It might not be exactly what they are looking for, and that’s okay. If it’s not, it’s not. But at least you gave it your best shot with the info you have. Hence why I suggest doing something like going through all your work, academic and volunteer experiences for each heading and writing down ANYTHING that had to do with that topic. Above is example for $$. You could do the same for difficult people.
Then, in your answer, you might say, “I don’t have a specific single example to use that meets all the elements, so I’m going to combine three smaller examples that will tease this out.” Is it ideal? Nope. But if it’s what you have, it’s what you work with.
In my experience, people who say they have no examples have NOT fully done step 3, far more than #1 or #2 above. You can, if completely stuck, say “Well, I’ve never dealt with that exact situation, but here’s what I would do based on some other things I’ve experienced.” So turning it from “tell us of a time” to “what would you do in this situation”. Again, not ideal. But if it’s what you have…
Good luck, let me know how you make out…
Paul
Thank you for this information, it has been really helpful! I have an interview for a development program and the competencies being evaluated are: * Humility: You are open to new and better ways of doing things even when you have developed comfort with the current method, and you are aware of and consider the impact of your words and actions on others.
* Collaborative: You share information and include relevant parties, you establish relationships that built on mutual trust and benefit, you seek consensus in a constructive fashion, you value and seek diverse perspectives, and you aim to co-create solutions and give credit to those involved in the process.
* Respectful of Diversity: You value differences; you seek different perspectives; you build on the strengths of others and find commonalities to achieve shared goals; you understand and value inclusion of all peoples, no matter how divergent their views.
* Analytical: You ask questions, you think about underlying assumptions, you create, gather, and summarize data in all its forms (quantitative, qualitative), you have strong observational skills, and you take a critical approach to understanding and solving problems.
* Oral communication: You breathe life into information to inform the public and engage or support the decision-making process. You have strong oral communication skills.
Can you help me think of examples?
Hi Eric,
I don’t know which dept that is, but I love that they give you the definitions. I can think of some generic stuff for each, don’t know if it will help. They’ll want concrete examples about YOU.
Humility — where someone suggested a change to a process you developed, and you took it onboard? For impact of words on others, perhaps some sort of conflict situation you had to deal with and how you approached it?
Collaborative – those are pretty self-explanatory examples in the definition.
RoD – An example where you sought out the views fo others, particularly if some of them were PoC or from marginalized groups. Could be formal consults, could be informal.
Analytical — research project would be obvious, or complex policy analysis
Oral — well, that one looks very “positive” but most wouldn’t have.
Overall, because of the developmental nature, I find it interesting that most of the descriptions are “walk on water” descriptions. I would approach it as almost “type A” personality examples — things you LED, that you JUMPED INTO, that you TOOK ON, that you PRESENTED. All the traits that put you in the centre of it making it all awesome, while remaining humble. It’s a bit funny because MANY of the things they want — the perfect soft skilled leader — are potentially incongruent with the strong leadership examples they ask for throughout. A strong salesperson / comms person might sale through, for example, because they are vibrant and social and upbeat, but nto having the introverted skills for more compassion, introspection and humility.
It’s like they want a TED Talk personality in an warm hug. Examples that show that would work.
I don’t know if ANY of that helps. It’s a weird list to try and guess the types of thigns you might have…Good luck, let me know how it goes.
Paul
I’m believe this is for the PARDP program at Natural Resources as I’m currently in the same boat as Eric! I also wonder if these interviews follow the same format as regular government interviews.
Hi Tina,
I don’t want to stress anyone out, but development program interviews can range from exactly the same as every other interview to something looking like the Hunger Games. 🙂 I hesitate to stereotype all development programs, but a lot of them are looking for “high fliers”, the top 10%, the best of the best, the Top Guns…umm, sorry, got off into movie clichés there. 🙂
There’s no way to really know in advance unless it’s a multi-year program and you know someone who went through it in previous years. And even then, it could have changed this year. The principles are often not very different, they can’t really be that different, the question is more one of intensity and aggressive screening.
For the Recruitment of Policy Leaders, for example, where DMs are often the ones doing the interviews, there are stories of certain DMs doing their best to knock people off their game in their answers. Like letting them get 10% into their structured answer, and then interrputing to say, “Okay, I see what you have there, but talk to me about THIS new aspect. What if X happens…?”. They’re looking to see how the person performs on their feet. And then let them go back to their original answer, see if they are totally flustered at that point or can get back into their groove.
I think it’s a terrible way to run an interview, but I’m not a DM. I think in most cases, you get a very different type of finalist than you would normally, and that is part of what these special recruitments are for — something you don’t get through the normal doors and windows. But there are pluses and minuses when a dept chooses to do that.
In the end, may the odds be forever in your favour if you volunteer as tribute! Let me know how it goes after all the candidates have gone…
Paul
Hi Paul, I am ashamed to say that I have a kind of a simple question that puzzles me. I am trying to prepare for being evaluated in regards to my “Ability to plan, analyze, and make recommendations”. Would this be the equivalent of “thinking things through”, “judgment”, “analytical thinking” or does it refer more to something more encompassing (in my opinion), like “strategic thinking”. Apart from using the policy cycle to frame my response, I am not sure exactly what to include under this umbrella topic to be concise enough yet touch upon the main aspects required by the topic. I feel like you already have answered this on the website, but I cannot seem to retrieve this information. I am wondering whether I am not overthinking this. Thank you so much! Orchid
Hi Orchid,
Good question. I like your approach…I think plan/analyse/make recommendations are pretty synonymous with the TTT, judgement, and analytical thinking. In the end, many of the same elements show up in all of them:
– Can you identify the appropriate factors?
– Can you weigh them properly?
– Can you balance them and figure out a course of action?
– Can you make a recommendation that fits the factors, weight and balance?
If we wanted to quibble a little, we could probably decide “planning” suggests multiple steps for something that the others may not, or something a little more operational. Or you could be planning simply how to do your analysis. TTT might want a bit more about upstream (root causes or policy objectives) and downstream (operations, symptoms, activities); judgement might put a bit more emphasis on the weighting; analytical thinking might put a bit more emphasis on research or logical structures.
The real difference embedded is that none of the others necessarily involve a recommendation and this one does. That means, by obvious extension, you will be asked to make a recommendaiton about something. Often the standard advice is “do less or nothing” vs. “do the same or minimal” or “do more or a lot” as three options. One frequent failure is someone says, “Well you have lots of options, here are 7, and my recommendation is to do ALL OF THEM!”. That’s not making a recommendation. A recommendation COULD be to do all of them but then you would at least need to say in which order…in order to make a recommendation, you have to be demonstrating a CLEAR choice; doing everything isn’t a choice. Remember though that the choice is almost irrelevant — it’s whether the choice is rationally connected to the original goal and reflects the weighted factors well.
But, yes you may be overthinking. If you get yourself into knots on something, simplest solution is often to ignore the headings and just focus on answering the question. The headings will fit fine then…
Paul
Hi Paul,
Thank you so much for your useful and detailed response, I appreciate it! Very interesting distinction among various forms of what I had thought was the same competency/concept! Some more food for thought for me, but for another day:)
For now, I will try and keep things simple.
Have a nice weekend!
Orchid
Hi Paul,
Your insights have been extremely useful for my competition prep (huge thanks!). I recently interviewed for an EC-05 position and they had standard behavioral questions. I prepared really hard and thought the interview went well. To my surprise, I received an email that screened me out of the competition as I did not meet the passing mark. I am shocked and angry given I am usually scared of written exams, but not interviews. I immediately wrote them back to ask for feedback and perhaps a re-evaluation (if possible). Do I have another recourse? Good thing is that I am working for the same department as a term where I applied. Not sure if that means anything (perhaps not given competitions are transparent).
Best regards,
Nina
Hi Nina,
There are dozens of reasons why someone might not make a passing mark on any element…the simplest is that, for example, they could have been marking judgement, initiative and interpersonal relations on one question, and they felt your answer covered #1 and #2 really well but not #3 sufficiently. Or you thought #2 was about initiative and it was more about interpersonal relations, so you didn’t talk about the areas they expected. Until you have your feedback, there is no cause for anger or re-evaluation or even recourse.
Alternatively, and this is quite common in EC-05 and -06 interviews, candidates frequently talk about what they would do for example in researching or analysing a file, but may not talk about how they would lead the file or move it forward. This happens lots of different ways…lots of different classifications. Once you hit middle level and above, they are often looking for a bit “more”, so they may have felt your answer was an amazing EC-04 answer but not good enough to display you’re at level EC-05. No way to know until you get your feedback.
As for what you can do about it, there are virtually only three options.
First, as you said, you ask for feedback and see if there was a simple error or any way for them to slip you back into the pool. Most will not do that under any circumstances other than obvious error. But I know someone who was screened out of EC-06 at 3 stages and each time argued her way back in. Not ideal, and chances are even if you are able to “force” your way into the pool, they won’t pull you.
Second, as with all comps, if you feel you were discriminated against in some way or there was a tangible abuse of authority, you can formally ask to be reassessed, etc. But it generally ends up with the same outcome. Rarely will another assessor read the notes and screen you in. Even with a succesfful PSLREB challenge, all they can do is say “do it again”, they can tell them to pass you or put you in a pool, that’s beyond their authority.
Third, in the final analysis, you can challenge any appointments from the process. But that doesn’t get YOU anything, it just stops someone else from being appointed. Who likely did absolutely nothing wrong, passed everything, yet gets their appointment torpedoed.
Good luck, but hold off on going nuclear until you find out your results. My favourite example is someone who tried for EX-01, got screened out, and found out that on a question ABOUT THEIR OWN JOB, they left out a huge portion of the response as they focused on what others were doing, not what he himself did. Simple mental oversight, thought he aced it, and the DG told him informally, “You failed cuz you screwed up!”. He couldn’t see how, until he got his feedback and said….ohhhhhhhhhh. It happens. Could be assessment, could be you just as easily. Or could have been really badly worded question, but that catches everyone equally so often seen as fair.
Paul
Hi Paul,
A quick thank you for this tremendous resource! It is comprehensive and extremely valuable.
I had a question I was wondering your thoughts/opinions on. I recently got into a pool for a position and was contacted by a manager for an informal ‘fit’ interview. It went well and I was told I would hear back in about a month. Fast forward – I have heard back. In short, they informed me that they did not receive the approval they had anticipated to fill the role that I interviewed for and that the process is now on hold.
My question is two fold: a) What are the odds (in your humble opinion) that they may eventually get their funding and contact me again; and b) Is there a chance I can capitalize on the fact that I am in a Pool to find a different position?
Thanks again for all the time you dedicate here to the community!
Sincerely
Ryan
Hi Ryan,
Congrats on getting to the pool, that’s a huge first step. Maybe even three steps 🙂
For the manager who contacted you, it sucks they have put it on hold. There are lots around town that were in the same boat. I don’t have strong indications either way on overall staffing, it’ll be tight for a few years, but every staffing is always unique. Your position could be on hold, one right beside it goes ahead; or vica versa.
Now, can you leverage it? Absolutely. Every place you see someone looking for someone, say on FB or the GC Connex, you’ll say “Hey! I’m in a pool!”. If you’re talking to a manager about what’s going on in their area, you’ll say “I’ve made a pool!”. If you’re ordering a coffee at Tim’s, tell them excitedely you made a pool and hope someone standing in line hears you. 🙂 Okay, not quite the last one. But still, yes, you will include that in any approach you do. Every staffing action takes time to do. Being in a pool or being bridgeable (from co-op / FSWEP) is like a fast pass for the manager. They can do 10% of the work they would have to otherwise, and you can start in weeks instead of months. Now, does that mean you’ll get a job? Not necessarily, but it makes you really attractive to anyone who is interested…To use a bad stereotype, it’s better to be single, attractive and rich when dating then simply single and attractive. You’re available, skilled AND you’re in a pool. Now you just have to find a match.
Good luck!
Paul
Hi Paul,
Firstly, thank you for putting together such an incredible guide; it has been an invaluable resource, shedding light on aspects of the interview process that are rarely discussed.
I recently applied for a position through a competitive process, and the hiring involves multiple positions at the same classification across several different streams. During the application, I had to choose a specific stream and address their essential qualifications. I received an invitation for an interview. In the invitation, they outlined the specific abilities they’ll be assessing: thinking things through, ability to work in a team, promote innovation, and guide change (for supervisory positions only), as well as mobilizing people (also for supervisory positions only).
Here’s my concern: I didn’t choose streams specifically designated for supervisory positions. I’m wondering if the interview questions will still touch upon these supervisory skills or if the invitation wasn’t tailored to my chosen stream.
Thanks in advance!
Noreen
Hi Noreen,
Alas, the short answer is it could be any of the options…perhaps they are doing all streams at once and just asking everyone to answer them all (i.e., not tailored, as you suggested) or it may be they didn’t notice up front, or it could be when you get your actual test, it will tell you do only the questions that don’t involve supervisory positions).
I hate to say this, as it throws some of the HR people under the bus, but sometimes they and the hiring managers haven’t thought through what a stream actually means. In an ideal world, you would have, for example:
3 questions common to everyone = 90 minutes
1 extra question for Stream 1 + 30 minutes
1 extra question for Stream 2 + 30 minutes
1 extra question for Stream 3 + 30 minutes
If you’re only going for basics, you’ll have 3 common + 1 specific = 4 questions in say 2 hours. If you qualified in MORE than one stream, you’ll have 3+1+1 questions in 2.5 hours or 3+1+1+1 questions in 3 hours.
Way back in time, I did a process where there were 3 streams, I qualified for all 3, and I felt really odd while writing. For the 3 common questions, instead of taking 90 minutes, I took almost 2 hours. Then I did the next 2 stream questions in about 20-25 minutes each, and the last one for my weakest area in about 10-15 minutes. Because I was in multiple streams, I ended up with better time management options than people who were only in 1 stream…and it made me wonder, what would have happened if I didn’t even answer the last q? That would have meant I spent 3 hours on two streams while anyone who only had two streams would have only had 2.5. I’ve talked to some various HR people about this type of scenario and they all said the same thing…shrug. Often the streaming happens because someone thinks it is a more efficient way to do HR — a big multi-faceted process with multiple streams — but in my experience, they don’t think through what streams will ACTUALLY mean. Far better to make the “extra” stuff experience assets if you can, but rarely does that get done.
On the other side of the table, I participated in a streamed process one time where the various people who did the questions had lots of people commenting on them SEPARATELY and by fluke and incompetence, it meant we asked all the policy people a stats methodology question (because someone wanted to make sure the policy people could do basic stats at least) AND we asked the research people a recommendation question (because someone wanted to make sure the researchers could be policy-relevant when needed), but NOBODY figured out that the policy people weren’t asked the recommendation question nor were the real researchers asked the stats question. Sigh. HR leaves it to the managers, the managers often don’t understand the implications of streaming, and the candidate is left scratching their head.
Sigh.
Good luck though! Just go and do it. If it’s not needed for the stream you’re in, failing that question won’t matter.
Paul
Hi Paul,
Thanks for getting back to me. Although I lack supervisory experience, I’m going to prepare examples I can use where I emulated those competencies on projects, however I certainly don’t have the required depth and breadth they were looking for on the job poster.
In the interview, if I’m asked supervisory position questions and get screened out, would challenging the process be appropriate? I reviewed the job posting and I didn’t find any mention of a requirement for experience in all the streams to apply and I definitely meet the requirements of the streams I selected.
Thanks again !
HI Noreen,
If you are asked supervisory, and are screened out because of the supervisory element, then it would be appropriate to ask. It’s possible they have some weasel words somewhere in that treats them as an asset and they can upgrade it…but one of the other elements that I failed to mention in “bad” HR for streams is often they include these other “asset” elements too but which ONLY apply to some streams…but if they are testing from the beginning, then they don’t know who is eligible or nto, and they often ask everyone.
I like your prep approach, and I would focus on that more than “what happens later”.
Paul
Hi Paul,
I am currently preparing for an interview and have found your guide super helpful so far. I am struggling a bit to study however, as I have no idea what the job is. The interview is recorded through vid-recruiter, I have no clue how many questions there will be, how long I have to answer each question, how many attempts I have at the recording, etc. The only information I have on the position itself is what sector it’s in. I don’t know what I would be working on, or even whether the position will be in the field, in the lab, or in the office.
The merit criteria is also super vague and I’m having a hard time taking notes for a few of them. Specifically regarding “demonstrating integrity and respect”; I am very much early career and haven’t really had any instances where I had to exhibit integrity in the face of an ethical dilemma. How would I incorporate this competency into my answer?
Is it typical to be far enough along in the process to be offered an interview and still be so much in the dark about the job description? I’ve spent many hours at this point preparing for the exam, writing the exam, and now preparing for this interview, and I don’t even know if the job they are considering me for is something I would be interested in.
I appreciate any insight that you can provide me regarding these questions!
Hi Cameron,
That is a bit odd. Was it a normal govt-advertised job on GCJobs? If so, the original poster should have most of the details, even if going through VidRecruiter. If the merit criteria are not there, you can always “guestimate” by looking at an equivalent job for a different poster, like EC_02 and see what several EC-02s look for, for example. Or a bunch of ENG-04, whatever the job classifications are.
Paul
Hi Paul,
Long time reader, first time commenter, but I’ll always be indebted to your guide for helping me improve significantly as an applicant.
I’m currently in a process where, if I actually pass my virtual solo interview (fingers crossed!), I may be invited to do an in-person group interview. The only things I know about it at this time is that it’s scenario-based and the specific competencies being tested will only be disclosed on the day of.
Perhaps because group interviews are a rare kind of assessment, I haven’t been able to find much substantive information online on tips and strategies for preparing for it. I did see your discussion with a commenter a year ago (https://polywogg.ca/hr-guide/interviews/#comment-1473) on how group interviews may be structured (roleplay vs group simulations) and tips (eg keeping your eyes on the prize; interaction process > proposed outcome), which is really helpful for imagining what this assessment might look like. But at the risk of counting unhatched chickens, I’m really interested in knowing what (if anything) can I do to prepare ahead of time for group-based scenario interviews, without knowing the format, size and composition of the group, and expectations for what they’re evaluating (process vs outcome)? What else could I expect in the format, and accordingly what are some strategies for making use of any prep time given before the interview, and for dealing the group interview and fellow participants? As well, if it’s a group simulation exercise and participants end up being as zero sum cutthroat about “winning” as in your example, do you have any advice for how a taciturn introvert can ensure my voice and input get heard by both the group and the assessors?
Thank you so much in advance for any sagely advice you may give!
Hi BB, glad the guide has helped you.
Your excellent searching found my previous comment, and I don’t have much to add to that for options for format. Generally speaking, stepping back, there are two reasons to do any group simulation over a single interview…first and foremost, it’s cheaper. If I have 4 interviewers watching a group of 5 people for an hour, that’s better than 4 interviewers interviewing one person for an hour each. The cost of course is that groups are harder to assess than indivudally.
However, the main reason is the second one — I can “test” you in a semi-real simulation, theoretically. As I already noted in the previous comment, that can be real or just psychotic, depending on who you are with.
In terms of preparation, I’ll start by saying I think the following is overkill, but if you have time, knock yourself out 🙂
Generally speaking, your first goal is not to be a jerk in the simulation. YOu want to be open, collaborative, non-confrontational, etc. So you can read about techniques to improve collaboration. Lots of gurus out there. You can even use some of it to quietly lead. For example, if you notice that person A spoke very little but BCD kind of overrode them, then it might be worthwhile to ask if you might clarify things a bit just to summarize. So, B, I’m hearing blah blah blah, while C is more bleh bleh bleh, and D is meh meh me. A, you mentioned bloh, can you expand a bit on that? Anyone stupid enough to stop them from doing that or overriding you will be pretty much out of the simulation as far as marks go. And there’s no way to shut you down except by being a jerk. In your place, you’ve summarized the group, sought out the views of someone else / gave them a platform by sharing yours, etc. Ideally, if it’s a discussion, you want to solicit info from people and quietly persuade when you have all the information, not leap to a decision. But you also are not an android collecting data until you have perfect information either. You use what you have heard to hone closer to a solution, but not closing doors as you go if you can help it. Look at open-ended questions, etc. You could even look at active-listening skills etc. You don’t want to be Dr. Phil asking people to get in touch with their feelings but softly guiding people to a solution-oriented discussion is good. There are lots of “solutions” that might look initially rather superficial but are surprisingly effective in “new groups”…there’s one for example about not saying “no but” to anything but more “yes and” — the first reduces and substitutes, the second builds off what others have proposed. It’s a mindset for those who are constantly criticizing to get into a more collaborative mindset. As I said, a bit superficial, but if done right, it IS the mindset you want. Remembering that there is no right answer, but there are ways to come to the answer that are better than others. Nobody should have to volunteer as tribute for District 12. 🙂
The second-tier of prep could be around what to do when dealing with a bully. The zero-sum game could be reframed that way — one person wanting their view held above all. De-escalation of conflict, deflection, active listening, dealing with bullies’ insecurity, refocusing energy…some like the de-escalation techniques, others like more of a tai chi or judo metaphor of using an opponent’s energy to change their own direction and flow. Obviously this would be more advanced, and it can even be riskier…if you attempt to “control” another member of the group and they react badly, will that reflect badly on you for it not working?
Again, I think both are overkill. You aren’t responsible for leading the group, you’re being evaluated for ability to work within a group that has no defined management, no hierarchy, and generall no built in leadership. It’s often very abstract from reality but we pretend it isn’t.
Good luck, and would love to hear how it goes for style / type of simulation…
Paul
Hi Paul, a belated thank you so much for your thorough and thoughtful advice. It turned out that the group interview was a group roleplay/simulation like the one you described, and contrary to the preliminary information I heard, we did get a list of competencies as well as a scenario prompt ahead of time so we can prep for presenting and debating our positions during the simulation. I also prepped a bit with some of the contingencies and approaches you recommended, but luckily, all the fellow interviewees had studied the competencies so they knew the “assignment” was to be as agreeable and constructive as possible, so it was on the whole a pretty friendly and pleasant environment. I’m still waiting results but either way, I’m really glad I got a chance to experience this interview format. Thank you again for all your help for both this interview and countless other application processes!
Hi B B, glad it worked out! Good luck on the results! 🙂
Hi Paul,
Your guide has been very helpful, thank you for all this very useful and timely advice. I recently passed screening and a written exam for a government position (I’ve spent my career in industry up to now) and I have an in-person interview next week. (I get the questions half hour ahead of the interview). The interview will be based on 4 competencies. I’ve read up on all your suggestions, used the definitions of the competencies that were given on my written exam to come up with behavioral indicators that I should use in my answers, made lists of possible questions that could be asked for each competency in order to come up with some brief answers to expand on in the interview and I feel decently prepared. I have a few questions though. If they ask for a behavioural example related to a work situation and I absolutely cannot come up with anything from my work experience, but I would have a good example from a personal situation, would it be acceptable in an interview to say something like ‘This situation has never happened to me at work, however I have a personal experience that would demonstrate the competency well’ and go on to describe the situation? Also, they haven’t given me any idea of how long the interview is set for – is 45min to 60 min a reasonable assumption? (It’s for an EG-05 position). Thanks in advance!
Hi Christine,
Thanks for your compliments, and let me pay you one in return. Your understanding of how the pieces work probably puts you in the top 10% of all the people I interact with. It was a great summary of going from A to B to C, etc. You’ll be in good stead for the process.
The short answer is if you don’t have a good work example, you really only have three choices at that point:
a. Give no answer which kills your candidacy with a zero score;
b. Make up an answer, which probably won’t be very detailed or accurate, let alone any of the ethical concerns; or,
c. Use an example from a non-work setting.
We can dance on the head of an existential pin of whether an average work example would be better or worse than a really good personal example, with no real outcome, but if you chooce between a,b,c above, C is obviously the best of three not-as-good-as-a-work-example choices.
I’ll even go further though. I have seen people use examples from volunteering, including one who used an example of organizing something in a sports league. It could have been “blah”, but he nailed it. He used it properly, built it up so it’s not something simple or a throwaway example, he really dug into it and showed the relevance. So full points. Would it be better if it had been teh same thing in a work envt? Sure. But was it needed? Nope, he nailed it.
This is particularly true where a person’s experience might be a bit asymmetrical. ECs, for example, rarely deal with financial files, yet if applying for a manager job, or a Director job, they’re often asked to explain how they managed financial resources. It rules some people out. Unless they’re creative and pull from their personal life.
I like your approach suggested. One tweak would be to make sure you mention how it would be different if it happened in work…for example, in a personal situation, there may be no official rules around you, or no hierarchy to a situation; at work it might be a more formal “solution” that is required. Another option some people have done is to say “Well, that’s never happened to me, but here’s what I would do if I faced such a situation.” It’s okay too, although if I personally had to choose between using a personal example vs. a hypothetical response, I’d go with personal too.
For your last question, yes, 45-60 minute is probably a good ballpark. Less senior positions might be as little as 30.
Good luck, let me know how it goes!
Paul
Thanks for your prompt reply, and yes, I agree, I would add extra information about how a work situation would be different if I end up using a personal experience in an answer. I’ll let you know how it turns out!
Oh, I did think of one more question. Do you know what the chances are that the questions will be labeled with the competency that is being tested? (not the definitions though, just a heads up that this question is about competency XXX). I’m asking because some questions can be somewhat ambiguous and I’m worried that I might end up answering as if it’s for one competency and not the one they are actually testing on. For example a question about an employee conflict could be about being a team player, or managing people or building trust through integrity.
Hi Christine,
A beautiful question, and one without answer. There is literally no way to know in advance or even really to predict.
My gut tells me that about 60-70% of processes tell you for lower-ranked internal processes. The more that it is external, the less it is included as some HR people think it confuses them (maybe as low as 50/50). Equally, the more senior the position, the less they do it, as some HR people and management thinks it is too much “spoon-feeding”.
In the bad old days, none of the processes told you anything. And as part of the changes in 2005, and a bit more modernisation of how things were done, it became a bit of a best practice to do it. There were simply too many comps where someone mis-judged a question, and blew it, even though they were a good candidate, simply because they thought it was a question about X instead of Y. Nobody who knows what they’re doing wants to risk losing someone good because of a bad question.
However, there are still some old-school types running processes who do not agree with that assessment. About 15y ago, I was in an EX-01 comp, back when I was still thinking of going that route, and there was NO indication in ANY of the Qs what was being marked. And every one of them marked 2-3, multiples overlapping. There were five Qs and five variables (ABCDE). For Q1, I thought it was about AB, it was AC so I didn’t pass that question because I didn’t talk about C enough. Similarly for Q2. For Q3, it clearly read like CD and apparently the creator of the Q thought it was A by itself. Even after I got feedback, I re-read the question and there were clear markers with the words from C and D elements IN THE QUESTION, but no, the guy thought it should have been only about A because he mentioned people (every question in the EX realm is generally about people). But I digress. And then for the fifth, I had NO IDEA which element it was supposed to be. So I ignored ABCDE adn just responded how I would handle the situation…10/10, best answer of everyone in the process. Which I commented upon in the feedback, very openly saying, “Huh, that’s interesting. I didn’t try to figure out what you were looking for and I got 10/10”. To which one of the EX-03s said, “That IS interesting…do that for all of them next time because your answer was perfect and the best we heard”. It is in part one of the reasons why I say only use my method below EX-01, AND why I hedge some times in different sections to say that sometimes, if you can’t figure out quickly what is asked for, ignore all of it and just focus on answering the question. My method works until it doesn’t. And it’s often in this form…”I don’t know what this question wants to know about!”. Ignore guessing and just answer.
Another person I discussed this type of conundrum with at one point said, “Well, there’s a lot of overlap between competencies anyway so answer as if it’s all three.”. I’m not sold on that 100% but it is an option.
Good luck! Let me know how it goes!
Paul
Thanks Paul, that’s great advice to not spend too much time stressing about what competency I think they might be testing me on (if it’s not immediately obvious) and to just answer the question with my best response!
I’m spending some time looking at interview Qs for each of the different competencies to have a better picture about what might be asked and just have something prepared for each, but in the event of real surprise question, I’ll just go with my gut.
Hi Paul, I had my interview today and it went well. It turned out that they did clearly lay out which competency they were testing (including the definition of it on the interview question sheet) which made things much clearer for me. And there were no surprise questions, just the competencies they said they would test. It was really similar to my written exam, just talking about the experiences and situations instead of writing them down.
I was given 30 minutes to review the questions and take notes that I could have with me in the interview. And since I’d prepared well with all your tips, I felt quite relaxed and believe I acquitted myself well. It also turns out they are hiring for 2 positions (the job description had said 1 position and 1 possible 2nd position but I guess the funding for the 2nd position was approved) so that doubles my chances. Now I just have to wait for the reference and security checks. I’ll check back in if I get a job offer 🙂
Hi Christine, thanks for the update, and it is good to see they doubled down on the transparency to not only say which competencies were for which but also what each meant.
Fingers crossed for you!
Paul
Just got the email that I made it into the pool! Really happy to know that I passed the interview and reference checks and now hoping to be one of the lucky one whose name gets pulled.
Congrats Christine! Nicely done!
Paul
Hello, could you please help me? For an interview, I just wanted to ask you if you could give me two examples for the following topics:
1) Initiative and self-management
2) Information-seeking and learning
Thank you
Hi Emily,
Initiative is already covered in lots of comments and in the main text. I’ll give you a walk-through example though if that wasn’t clear. When I worked at a university in a computer shop on campus, we had two duties — answering support calls and selling people prepared software (open-source) at cost of the disks if they came into the office. However, the shop was really confusing, nobody knew if the disks were in inventory, what had been sold, etc. So I decided that I would do up a small schedule for the team that each day when they started they would check inventory and spend time in their shift preparing new disks if we were low on stock, AND I created a semi-receipt system that would show Person X bought a disk, how much they paid, etc. which would go to them AND us for receipt purposes, instead of just some random cash total having no idea if it was right or not at the end of the day. Basic bookkeeping.
For initiative, you need to show an example where:
a. SOMETHING YOU CAME UP WITH: it wasn’t assigned to you, and it wasn’t expected of you. In the example above, I was supposed to sell disks and answer the phone. I wasn’t expected to create a mini-inventory and bookkeepign system. So, good for initiative
b. TOOK PLANNING: You want something that you have to think about, consider different options. My example doesn’t really include that, as written. I would have to think about other elements I did to include, like looking around at what other informal shops were doing on campus and considering their options, talkign to my coworkers, talking to my bosses about the idea and the benefits BUT NOT HOW (I didn’t really do that, but if I did, it would be part of it, but I can’t ask them HOW to do it, then it wouldn’t be about me). Ideally, you also have something that is innovative or challenges the status quo in a good way.
c. TOOK EFFORT: My example doesn’t really involve much effort. I had it set up and running on a slow day. Great, but you ideally would have something that took some longer effort to realize the benefits.
d. STRONG RESULTS: My example has that in spades, although I don’t talk about it above. My bosses were happy, 3 years later they were using the same system I created with only minor tweaks over time. And the little department was using my system to report to others what services we offered in that shop, how we were doing month over month for demand, etc.
To add self-management to the list, basically they’re looking for you to be able to keep working without running to your boss every 5m to say “What’s next?”.
For info seeking and learning, it’s not one you see very often. I’m not entirely sure what they are expecting for it. However, honestly, if it was me, I would use the “initiatve” model above and apply it to my self-learning and development. Soooo, you perhaps start a new job, seek out all mandatory training, add in free online courses in the Canada School of Public Service that would be helpful (aka the equivalnet of going beyond assigned readings in university or college to look at additional recommended readings), reaching out to network with knowledgeable colleagues, taking notes, sharing articles with others that you find helpful (note this does NOT mean spamming people, you would need to specify only the best would be shared aka a “curation” function).
Hi Paul,
I know you’ve gone through those questions but I just wanted to be sure.
I’ve been invited to an informal interview to discuss work arrangements at the end of my application process with Service Canada. I’m curious what kind of questions they will ask considering I’ve already completed all online tests, references, fingerprinting, and an online interview on situational questions.
Hi Loulou
Not sure what they mean by work arrangements. Normally that only happens at the final stage after you’ve accepted a job or been offered one. Did it have stuff around being in Ottawa? Working remotely? etc.
Paul
Hi Paul!
Thank you so much for your valuable resource.
Thanks to your guidance and the Reddit I felt super prepared for my application and an external applicant for a specific appointment, and subsequently made it passed the interview stage into a pool for GT03. It is not fully accessed as they haven’t even asked about references yet. However, I have a second interview coming up, via video call. I assume this is a “best fit” type interview but I’m not sure, the email just said it would assess my suitability against the specific position. But it wouldn’t be a “test” again, right? Since they have already assessed me against the Statement of Merit and determined I was “essentially qualified” (to quote the email)?
Additionally, I have scoured your website and the Reddit, as well as reviewed the job posting vs my resume again to make notes. Is there anything else I should be prepared for or any recommendations?
Hi Lou,
So, there’s a small nuance to confirm. You said you were put in a pool, and then said it wasn’t fully assessed because they hadn’t done references yet. Did they SAY it was officially “partially assessed” or are you just assuming that? Because they don’t have to do references, if they can assess everything other ways. I was just responding to someone else about a P-A pool and subsequent interview, and the advice applies to your situation too. When you’ve heard from assessors that you’re in “some sort of pool”, and then they want to do a subsequent interview, that interview is one of three types:
a. If they didn’t say you’re IN a pool, they might offer feedback interview (not the case here);
b. If thye say you’re in a partially assessed pool, they can do a formal interview to assess an additional element not yet assessed from the original Statement of Merit Criteria (say, comms abilities) OR they could be doing just a best fit interview…this sounds like a best fit interview, which they can do before completing other steps.
c. If you’re in a fully assessed pool, they can do the best fit interview.
So, go back to the email they sent you. If it said partially assessed, you’re likely in situation B. If it just said pool, you’re likely in situation C.
Assuming best-fit, nothing really to prepare other than perhaps a 60 second summary of “who you are”. Sometimes they say, “Hey let me tell you about the job and then perhaps you can tell me a bit about your interests, how you might fit in that role, etc.”. So having a 60s module or two about yourself, history, interests, whatever are nice little nuggets to have ready.
Either way, good luck! And let me know how it goes…
Paul
Thanks so much Paul. Very detailed and helpful as always.
Based on your comment vs the email I received I think I fall into Type C. So I’ll definitely work on my elevator pitch 😉
Thanks again! Will keep you updated.
Hi Paul, just wanted to give you an update. I got notice today that I did not get the position. The second interview completely threw me for a loop so I suspect that was the reasoning. They asked me very specific questions about asset qualifications, some were on the job posting and some were not so I do not think that I meet some of the needs. Also they asked me questions like “tell me a time when you did exhibited X” and I assumed at this point they wouldn’t ask those questions, but I should have prepared myself more.
I have asked for feedback, so hopefully something valuable is there.
Anyway, I really appreciate all the effort and support you put into this.
Hi Lou, sorry to hear that. If they were asking at second interview, they were still assessing from scratch. Note though that asset qualifications are really disheartening but a lot of the time they don’t apply to you, which is a bit odd to explain. Hmm…
Okay, so let’s go with example of someone hiring a computer person. They want a PC person, but they would consider MAC, mainframe, Linus and iOS to be assets. But instead of asking for EXPERIENCE in those other areas, they made them knowledge/abilities/personal suitability questions. Which means the ONLY way they can evaluate them is to either include them in a test OR interview. And if they do them in the test or interview, EVERYONE gets asked them.
In the end, it’s a crapfest. For example, I ask you a bunch of PC questions, you nail them, great. But if I’m testing all the assets, I *also* have to ask you all the other Qs too…even though you have NO interest in those other areas, no experience or ability in them, and you’re going to bomb them completely. Which you do. YOu feel worthless, but fyi, those Qs may not have even mattered. The person hiring might only care about the main elements. But someone wants to test assets too, so they do.
I’ll give you a personal experience where the BC govt did something REALLY wonky one time long ago. Recruiting for the summer, they wanted people how had knowledge of Law or Biology/Chemistry or Computers. There very distinct fields, right? So for some strange reason, they gave all of us the SAME test with all three components in it. None of the Law people could answer the other two areas, and to be honest, while I was in Law, I couldn’t even answer the LAW question. I looked at the other two and said, “Well this is a waste of my time, and didn’t even bother.” I got up and said thank you for consideration, but if that’s the way they run tests, I don’t want to work for them. See ya…our recruitment office ripped them a new one and blocked them from recruiting from us for a year.
Assets are almost NEVER handled well because the people who WANT assets often fail to think about how it will be tested and HR doesn’t warn them. They often come from, say, five managers wanting to hire, but HR doesn’t want to run 5 separate processes. So they merge it, agree on a bunch of main elements they all need, and then throw everything “extra” from any of the 5 areas in as “assets”. A better way is to do formal streams — and YOU decide which streams you want to be eligible for. So, in my example, I wouldn’t have applied for the computers or bio/chem stream. I would have just applied for law only and thus ONLY seen tests related to law.
Which is a long rant to say, generally, being asked irrelevant assets does not mean they don’t want you, but rather that they want at least ONE person with the assets. It COULD mean they really want the assets, often it is just process.
Paul
How confusing, haha. It definitely feels as though the stream could have been more defined like you mentioned above.
I did get a response saying I did well in both interviews, it was a pleasure meeting with me, and they (panel of 3) thought I was qualified well BUT they went with someone who had 2 things that I did not. Unfortunately, neither of those things were listed anywhere on the job description/posting and neither of those things had anything to do with what I was told the job would be. In fact, one of those things is a dead skill which the hiring manager even pointed out. I can’t imagine they would have any benefit in lying to me but the job I applied for is pretty niche and the reasons I didn’t get the job don’t really have anything to do with that niche job. At least not traditionally.
Anyway, it is what it is, maybe it won’t work out with the other person, you never know. I would still be interested in working there so I made all my correspondence incredibly professional and kind with the hopes it helps me in the future somehow. I am going to assume (maybe at least to soften the blow to my ego haha) the fact I didn’t get the job because of mystery unknown assets means I was one of the top candidates, just not THE top candidate.
Side question: when they say they’ll keep my application on file, does that even mean anything? Is it just because the pool is still open? It feels like a generic response, something we’d here in the “regular” world as a gesture to soften the blow. Just curious if you think it’s the same in regards to government correspondence?
Hi Lou, soooo it’s a pretty wide spectrum for “we’ll keep it on file”.
1. If formal process for pool, then anyone found qualified is definitely on file until the pool expires.
2. If it was informal interviews, the fact they interviewed is good sign, likely they were interested enough…and the fact that someone had extra skills you don’t is not uncommon. For example, suppose someone was hiring front-line service delivery in Vancouver, and they talk to candidate who happens to have Korean. Not required, not necessarily linked to job, but hey, if the person is qualified, why not take it. However, they are really softening the blow. Usually, and by that I mean almost always, the person has the same or better qualifications for what they are looking for but it’s easier to tell you that it was “hey same as you but they have other stuff too”. If they liked you better on core qualifications, they’d be telling her that they liked some other random background stuff you have that she doesn’t.
3. Or it could be simple fluff. Yep, keep you on file, same as private sector fluff. But they interviewed you, so I’d say it’s a step above that.
Good luck!
Hi Paul,
Do you have any advice regarding video interviews? It seems almost too good to be true to have 2 tries and prep time for each question so I was wondering if I should just prep based on your notes and/or if there is anything else to consider.
Current plan of action: assume 3 types of questions for each criteria (mine are effective oral comms, thinking things through, attention to detail, and working effectively with others) and prepare structured responses to potential questions that could be asked for each?
Thank you!
Hi Fatema,
Video interviews are harder than they seem. Having two tries is fine, but note that your prep time is often “shorter” in the sense of, say, 5 minutes before the Q. And you’re recording yourself, which makes people nervous. So it is not uncommon for people to get flustered. The content prep is the same, but you should think about perhaps testing your “fluster” factor by recording yourself on your phone, or your Vid Cam in advance so you know if you seem too dull or too animated, or you get confused, etc. One other small factor is to try to remember to stare into your camera, NOT your computer screen. If you think of newscasters, they look into the camera, and if you see them with their eyes looking somewhere else, it seems odd. On Video Calls, people often look into the centre of their monitor — except that is NOT where their camera is. Play with it a bit to see what is natural…you don’t want to be looking all around (up / down / up / down), but you also don’t want to look like you’re going off screen either.
Paul